Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think it really comes down to the attitude of the player. If it's being done for financial reasons but the player is clearly out to have a good time and is likeable, I wouldn't have a problem playing against anything. If over time, an attempt is being made to make things better then great. I personally don't like the mass of grey plastic some players have which doesn't change over days, weeks and months.

As for the snobby "Not a chance" brigade we've seen here. I'd like to see how they would feel if somebody didn't play with them because of their badly painted minis or ugly face.

 purplkrush wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I am sorry, but if you can't afford the hobby, then don't do it, or stick casually playing with your sister OP. Just my opinion.

Why do you get to define "this hobby" for other people? Or do you mean just because the OP asked about tournaments and only not for tournaments? If so, I agree.

Paper miniatures are for home use and can be awesome for that.

Rippy isn't "defining the hobby" for anyone. The hobby is Miniatures Wargaming. It was defined long before Rippy was probably born so getting up on him about " the hobby" is BS.

And yet, Rogue Trader and 2nd edition 40k came with paper flats to play the game with.



Can you tell me where the material and the dimensional number of the miniatures in question is codified?

What's this?



Gamers from decades ago should have definitely traveled to the future so you could define miniature wargaming for them.

 Hollow wrote:
if somebody didn't play with them because of their badly painted minis or ugly face.

I wouldn't want to play with someone so shallow that they cared about my beautiful face, and if someone doesn't like my fully painted and based army, it's not like there aren't a plethora of other people to play with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 frozenwastes wrote:

 purplkrush wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I am sorry, but if you can't afford the hobby, then don't do it, or stick casually playing with your sister OP. Just my opinion.

Why do you get to define "this hobby" for other people? Or do you mean just because the OP asked about tournaments and only not for tournaments? If so, I agree.

Paper miniatures are for home use and can be awesome for that.

Rippy isn't "defining the hobby" for anyone. The hobby is Miniatures Wargaming. It was defined long before Rippy was probably born so getting up on him about " the hobby" is BS.

And yet, Rogue Trader and 2nd edition 40k came with paper flats to play the game with.

Can you tell me where the material and the dimensional number of the miniatures in question is codified?

What's this?

Spoiler:

Gamers from decades ago should have definitely traveled to the future so you could define miniature wargaming for them.

They look terrible by today's standards

 Rippy wrote:

They look terrible by today's standards

Is that relevant to whether or not they are a part of the hobby?

I won't play against unpainted miniatures, but I won't deny that those doing so are participating in miniature wargaming. My aesthetic evaluation is irrelevant.

I'm against paper miniatures at events and in tournaments. Just as I am against unpainted miniatures in events and tournaments. Or gaming in public in general. Doesn't mean I'd define doing so as not even being in the hobby. That's just bizarre.

 frozenwastes wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

They look terrible by today's standards

Is that relevant to whether or not they are a part of the hobby?

I won't play against unpainted miniatures, but I won't deny that those doing so are participating in miniature wargaming. My aesthetic evaluation is irrelevant.

I never tried to define the hobby, someone else claimed my personal opinion is defining the hobby haha. I said what my opinion is, as in, ME. I wouldn't want to play against unpainted armies or paper miniatures for the same reason.

if it were a friend I would absolutely play paper models taped to pennies as bases. if you seem nice and wanted to learn the game before diving in to try an army sure. heck if you were in my club's facebook group we would probably bring the models you wanted to try out if we collectively have them for the evening. That said in a tournament setting the answer is a firm no, and in a local store setting if it was paper models coming in week after week the local store is a business so I would really hope you would try and scrape together the funds to buy a box here and there to phase out the paper.

I agree on the formal tournament setting. But outright refusing to play someone whose enthusiastic enough about the game to make a paper army, in a casual setting smacks of a person I have no interest in playing.

 davou wrote:
I agree on the formal tournament setting. But outright refusing to play someone whose enthusiastic enough about the game to make a paper army, in a casual setting smacks of a person I have no interest in playing.

I can make a paper army in 20 minutes, that doesn't make me enthusiastic.

Don't get me wrong, if someone wanted to try the game for the first time, and has a phobia of entering GW stores to do so for some reason (Games Phobic?), I would let them try with paper minis. But by that stage, I would just let them use my other army.


EDIT: and you playing with them doesn't make you a hero. This game takes a fair bit of effort as it is, setting up etc. Just seems like a waste of time to me if you are playing pieces of paper, not worth the time. Doesn't mean I wouldn't offer to do something different with OP, maybe go for a brisk jog, a latte at a cafe, or even play a little bit of video games. Turning on my xbox involves about the same effort as printing paper miniatures infact!

Proxies are a great way to test armies or units before you buy.. If this was your plan or you were short on scratch for a proper army it would be fine.
As you can see people's opinions vary on this.

Unless you spammed the best units in the army i would be fine. A few years back we had a friendly weekend tourney at a friend's house, just bros.

One friend used note cards to represent ork bikes. And other card stock to represent others. No bases, no 3 dimension no graphics just laying flat blank note cards. His whole army consisted of 2-3 units spammed with note cards for 2000 points. We were like... dude get decent proxies, balance your list or gtfo. Of course we did not make him gtfo but he certainly knew pretty quickly it was not cool.

When you're playing privately and you know your opponent, anything goes. But when you play people you don't know for a pickup game or tournament there is the expectation you have the correct models. Its important to consider your opponent's enjoyment of the game, which may be affected by the visual aspect of seeing the physical models. Its about respect.

Of course there are strangers who wouldn't care, but there are also strangers who not only want to play vs models, but they want to play vs *painted* models. Best is to clarify with the stranger before. But you shouldn't be offended if people don't want to play you.

I remember when I was 10 or 11 and just starting I used lego on top of cardboard squares (whfb) when I was at home. But I never took lego into my local hobby store... I played with the models I had.

It's like a 40k marine player going and trying to play 30k with their army. Yea people won't mind initially that you're using 40k proxies, like thunderfire as a quad-mortar etc. But you're going to get an army eventually right?

A large reason people play is because of the aesthetic, paper slips aren't part of it. Would I play Infinity with Bolt Action minis? (TLoS nonwithstanding) No.

Would I show up to a LARP in a LEGO Knights outfit? Maybe. Just once though for a good laugh.

For the people who would like to see proper models on the table, they're not ask you pay top dollar for the premium plastic GW puts out. They're asking for you to put genuine effort into the hobby, as we all.

In an extreme case, I respect the man who goes out and builds an entire army of papercraft IG tanks over the man who spends 10 grand on a professionally painted and assembled army for which he probably just saw in person last night.

However I personally feel that the gaming aspect is the weakest part of the hobby (between the recent bad rule writing and the utter vitriol that is the rules discussion, there's a lot to be left desired for the gaming aspect atm), so skipping the rest of it just to jump to the game doesn't necessarily offend me, but makes me feel like the person playing is missing out or glossing over it. Understandably the people I know who continued with the hobby are invariably ones who I've helped get their first models off the floor; those that just keep borrowing my models eventually feel disenfranchised with the game as the army is not truly "Theirs".

While I understand financial situations can make army building hard or impossible at times, I also feel like I should point out that the 40k hobby isn't something that can be accomplished in a week or a month. Hell for me some armies took me years to finish (in fact I've only recently finished 3 of my dozens of armies). And hunting down the models for cheap can often be a bit of fun on it's own (especially when you find that awesome deal and snag it up).

Bottom line is, if you just want to try the game for an afternoon or something, paper models are perfectly ok (even at stores). But just know that the hobby has a much wider scope, and in spite of what we know of the costs (and the constant complaining about it), some money and effort must be sank into this if you want to join the hobby as a whole.

If you were looking for a game outside of the house with 2d miniatures the way to go about it might be to open with, "hey, look at this project I've been working on, it is a little different to normal," instead of going straight into asking for a game. That way you can gauge this persons response to your army first. 2d figures are a bit quirky and not something everyone is really familiar with. They might be quite interested to see such a novelty in person, especially if you have gone to the effort of high res images cut to size and scenically based.

This is really only appropriate at friends houses or in private clubs. I don't think it would be so cool to do something like this in a store, unless the manager is enthusiastic about it too.

 Rippy wrote:

 davou wrote:
I agree on the formal tournament setting. But outright refusing to play someone whose enthusiastic enough about the game to make a paper army, in a casual setting smacks of a person I have no interest in playing.

I can make a paper army in 20 minutes, that doesn't make me enthusiastic.

Don't get me wrong, if someone wanted to try the game for the first time, and has a phobia of entering GW stores to do so for some reason (Games Phobic?), I would let them try with paper minis. But by that stage, I would just let them use my other army.


EDIT: and you playing with them doesn't make you a hero. This game takes a fair bit of effort as it is, setting up etc. Just seems like a waste of time to me if you are playing pieces of paper, not worth the time. Doesn't mean I wouldn't offer to do something different with OP, maybe go for a brisk jog, a latte at a cafe, or even play a little bit of video games. Turning on my xbox involves about the same effort as printing paper miniatures infact!

I don't think you could do a good job of it in 20 minutes, though.

Just sourcing and resizing for printing (or even hand drawing and colouring) is going to take way longer than that. And that is before you consider the effort that will go into 'de-sprueing' and basing.

Some people will put much greater time and effort into their 2d miniatures than many (most?) put into their 3d figures. I'd rather play the first group than the second! I think I may be in the minority there though.

 Quickjager wrote:
It's like a 40k marine player going and trying to play 30k with their army. Yea people won't mind initially that you're using 40k proxies, like thunderfire as a quad-mortar etc. But you're going to get an army eventually right?

Yes I plan on getting an army built off of Ebay and GW. I'm still getting used to the rules and am waiting until I know exactly what i need for my army.

 TheIngeniusNoob wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
It's like a 40k marine player going and trying to play 30k with their army. Yea people won't mind initially that you're using 40k proxies, like thunderfire as a quad-mortar etc. But you're going to get an army eventually right?

Yes I plan on getting an army built off of Ebay and GW. I'm still getting used to the rules and am waiting until I know exactly what i need for my army.

you should look into vassel and other virtual games to give it a go. also most clubs have facebook groups, see local clubs or flgs express interest and I bet people with spare armies would let you test pilot one to see what you like.

if you back them with cereal boxes I reserve the right to deduct victory points from you due to underhanded distraction tactics.

craggy wrote:
if you back them with cereal boxes I reserve the right to deduct victory points from you due to underhanded distraction tactics.

lol

Personally I wouldn't mind at all as long as you have the army written down for me to look at and agree to. In a tourney setting rules are rules so they may not allow it but that's up to them but personally if you wanted a friendly match in a game shop I'd be fine with it. Most of my armies are fluff ones anyway and not built for super OP metagame so any opportunity for some fun story progression of my Orks is a welcome thing.

I'm just wondering, for those who have said they'd happily play against it outside of a tournament setting but think that tournaments should require models, what is the rationale behind this position?

 Pr3Mu5 wrote:
I'm just wondering, for those who have said they'd happily play against it outside of a tournament setting but think that tournaments should require models, what is the rationale behind this position?

Tournaments are the 40k equivalent of a dog show.

Would you show up to a dog show with a stuffed animal?

The pseudo-bourgeois elitism really knows no boundaries.

It's all reducible to class warfare.

 davou wrote:
has a phobia of entering GW stores to do so for some reason (Games Phobic?)

They have a sense of smell and don't want to hurl?
There's a reason gamer reek is aka "the funk of 40,000 years" and it's not just because the aircon isn't up to the task.

 Pr3Mu5 wrote:
I'm just wondering, for those who have said they'd happily play against it outside of a tournament setting but think that tournaments should require models, what is the rationale behind this position?

A tournament is a more serious setting; its the same reason I would let someone take a move back in chess if we were playing in a cafe and they saw a major fuckup a split second after putting their move down, or why I would let someone start from a certain position in a Jiujitsu match. I'm here to have fun and help you have fun. I expect the same thing from you so that the engagement bears repeating.

Starting something 'for fun' with a dictate sets myself up for no fun. In a tournament of whatever sort... I'm not here to have fun, Im here to test myself at the highest effort, and expect the same in return. I wouldn't be allowed to play a 3 drop pods and 4 sodapop bottles list, and neither should someone else. Even if the intention wasn't for exploit, it smacks of being a place where people would exploit the best expensive or hard to acquire models in proxy.

TLDR : You're paper army is fine if we're having fun, and even better if you're a bit nervous about it and buy me a beer bribe. Its certainly not if we both paid to be here and/or are fighting over a prize of some kind, even if its a token.

Yes, they should be allowed. I don't care if its a tournament or not. This is an insanely expensive hobby, and I don't think anyone should be forced to buy and paint models to participate in them, so long as they can proxy them sufficiently to meet the standards of the game (TLoS, appropriate base sizes, etc.)

Me? I have the actual models. I'm a glutton for punishment, and I find the hobbying aspect quite enjoyable (no doubt I suck at it, but I enjoy it).

That said, I don't mind if presentation is part of a tournament score (there's a distinction to be drawn between forcing and encouraging behavior), and I've yet to participate in any actual tournaments (except as a judge at an unofficial one in the LGS) so my take on appropriateness in a tournament setting is quite limited.

I applaud the inclusiveness (too many of us nerds are mean spirited), but I have to disagree with the tournament thing.

Sure the game is expencive, and no one should be excluded.... but that does not mean you get a pass on being included either. Entering a tournament is elective; the organizers should be as free to refuse you as you are to refuse to participate. ((I've been around when a tournament decided that despite not having enough games to fill a store, were going to disallow anyone else use of the empty tables in a game shop that they didn't own... Walking up to the counter and cancelling a few hundred bucks in pre-order had the owner shut them up pretty quick))

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
This is an insanely expensive hobby, and I don't think anyone should be forced to buy and paint models to participate in them,

I don't think a hobby which costs you about 400 bucks to get a full-sized army can be considered insanely expensive.
Most hobbies and sports cost at least 150 bucks every three months more or less (running shoes, 3x racquets, other gear, games+internet+console/pc, even books).

If your opponent agrees, then why not? If you enjoy the hobby, enjoy it the way you want to. I don't think people will freak, but admins at tournaments definitely will. You may not have as much of an immersive story, but you could definitely do it. Please, just don't be the guy that stands a bag filled with gravel onto the table and says that it's a Ta'Unar Supremacy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jeez I just read through the other comments, and this is a very toxic topic...

 Pr3Mu5 wrote:
I'm just wondering, for those who have said they'd happily play against it outside of a tournament setting but think that tournaments should require models, what is the rationale behind this position?

a few reasons, the first being the same as a previous answer. if it is a pickup game at a club, public space or home that is different than using paper craft in a game store where the owners are trying to run a business. most tournaments I have seen are run by a store with prize support. Sometimes there is an entry fee, but often it is $5-10 with 10 or so players and the prizes are worth more than the entry fees plus the time of having a judge there be it the owner's time to be said judge or an employee they pay to do it.

secondly if the tournament was at a club or just a standalone tournament then if the models were wysiwyg AND somehow also occupied the same 3d space then ok sure but it would include the infantry as it is easier to hide a sliver of paper taped to a base than it is a 3d model.

 Traditio wrote:

 Pr3Mu5 wrote:
I'm just wondering, for those who have said they'd happily play against it outside of a tournament setting but think that tournaments should require models, what is the rationale behind this position?

Tournaments are the 40k equivalent of a dog show.

Would you show up to a dog show with a stuffed animal?

The pseudo-bourgeois elitism really knows no boundaries.

It's all reducible to class warfare.

My god, this man's a Marxist!

 Pr3Mu5 wrote:
I'm just wondering, for those who have said they'd happily play against it outside of a tournament setting but think that tournaments should require models, what is the rationale behind this position?

To be clear I said I'd be happy as long as progress was being made in some manner to having a "real" army.

But as to tournaments, there is a large enough problem with repetitive army lists in tournaments already, if you remove the need to have built and painted models everyone will be playing the same paper army, which to me just seems uninteresting. Further in the pick up game case, I didn't spend any money to play that game, I did pay for the tournament so expecting a certain standard to me seems fair. Now I wouldn't oppose a TO who wanted to allow anything, I might just choose not to go myself.

Pr3Mu5 wrote:I'm just wondering, for those who have said they'd happily play against it outside of a tournament setting but think that tournaments should require models, what is the rationale behind this position?

Usually because the TO says so. That's reason enough. If you don't agree with that, then you don't take part in the tournament.

Every tournament I've done has asked for as close to WYSIWYG, three colours, and based, using official models. I agreed to those rules, and took part. If I didn't agree to that, I wouldn't play.

If you're in a FLGS or even a GW store, the store owner is within any rights to deny you access to play a game. It's their store, their rules. That's why the only place you can always get away with paper models is in your own store or house. Beyond that, you're relying on the opinion of the store owner, who most likely is not in this discussion. Tournaments, nearly always, ask for full models. They don't even need a reason for it, beyond "because I said so". That's why you can't bring paper models into most tournaments: because the rules of the event prohibit it.