How Important Is Painting To You?

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.

**JNAProductions**

Elbows wrote:
That quote didn't say anything about how you enjoy your hobby. He said he didn't understand why people do that. He also presents some valid points; if painting isn't an interest - why bother with tabletop wargames when other games exist that aren't based around building a 3D aesthetic simulation?

He believe it to be lazy, and that's a pretty valid argument with the ease with which you can paint armies today. I don't know the author of that post, but I'm inclined to agree with him. I don't understand why someone would get joy out of unpainted models and sub-par terrain; but that doesn't equate to it being wrong, if it's something you're doing by yourself. I do get a say in the matter when the game occurs between us though, thus I can decline the game if desired.

Do you not see the insulting nature of the post?

I don't have an issue with someone saying "I don't get people who want to play 40k without painting," but I do take umbrage to being called lazy because I don't enjoy painting as a hobby.

**Elbows**

Freeflow44 wrote:
You can all have your own “rules” to enjoy the hobby. You only want to play against fully painted armies on nicely built tables, fine when that person at the FLGS with a grey plastic army asks you for a game, say “No thank you” and leave it at that. Don’t go into a diatribe about the sin of grey plastic

Sure, no one disagrees with that. Did anyone here say that go on rants about it in front of people who ask them for a game? This is an internet forum, and the discussion was started...nothing wrong with people actually responding.

**Crimson**

JNAProductions wrote:
None of us have said "You HAVE to play against unpainted minis".

In fact, I directly said "If you don't want to play with unpainted minis, also totally fine."

But to say that EVERYONE has to enjoy the hobby in the same way seems... At a minimum, foolish, and at it's most extreme, really flipping rude.

Look, you can grind your models to fine dust and snort them if that makes you happy, but I don't want to participate in that and it is not how they were intended to be used. The game is marketed as a visual experience. Every GW picture of the game being played shows painted models. They publish instructions on painting models. The historical wargaming hobby of whic the Warhammer is offshoot exclusively uses painted models. So yes, painting the models is how it is 'intended' to be done and it is not an unreasonable expectation.

**Elbows**

JNAProductions wrote:
Elbows wrote:
That quote didn't say anything about how you enjoy your hobby. He said he didn't understand why people do that. He also presents some valid points; if painting isn't an interest - why bother with tabletop wargames when other games exist that aren't based around building a 3D aesthetic simulation?

He believe it to be lazy, and that's a pretty valid argument with the ease with which you can paint armies today. I don't know the author of that post, but I'm inclined to agree with him. I don't understand why someone would get joy out of unpainted models and sub-par terrain; but that doesn't equate to it being wrong, if it's something you're doing by yourself. I do get a say in the matter when the game occurs between us though, thus I can decline the game if desired.
Do you not see the insulting nature of the post?

I don't have an issue with someone saying "I don't get people who want to play 40k without painting," but I do take umbrage to being called lazy because I don't enjoy painting as a hobby.

Sure, the nature of the post is a bit dickish, but it didn't contain what you said it did when you quoted it. You said it was an example of being told you're doing the hobby wrong, and that wasn't in the quote.

Regarding being called lazy, is that not generally accurate? Is it offensive to say "I'm too lazy to paint the figures", or "I don't want to put in the effort to paint the figures". I'd respect more people if they simply said that, instead of hide behind rather flimsy excuses for not partaking in the aesthetic function of the game. It's incredibly easy to paint armies to a minimal standard today. The easier something is, the more lazy it appears when you're not willing to do it - does that make sense to you?

Would you prefer to be simple labeled as selfish instead of lazy? Is there a term you'd prefer for not wanting to bring your best effort to a cooperative social function? Should I not take umbrage when you and your fellow supporters call people like me elitist or gatekeepers, etc? Just seems like a very bizarre and defensive stance you've taken when someone is stating what appears logical.

**JNAProductions**

Crimson wrote:
JNAProductions wrote:
None of us have said "You HAVE to play against unpainted minis".

In fact, I directly said "If you don't want to play with unpainted minis, also totally fine."

But to say that EVERYONE has to enjoy the hobby in the same way seems... At a minimum, foolish, and at it's most extreme, really flipping rude.

Look, you can grind your models to fine dust and snort them if that makes you happy, but I don't want to participate in that and it is not how they were intended to be used. The game is marketed as a visual experience. Every GW picture of the game being played shows painted models. They publish instructions on painting models. The historical wargaming hobby of whic the Warhammer is offshoot exclusively uses painted models. So yes, painting the models is how it is 'intended' to be done and it is not an unreasonable expectation.

D&D 3.5 is meant to be played with a Healbot Cleric, a Blaster Wizard, a Sneaky Rogue, and a Big Fighter. Am I wrong to play it with an Archivist, a Gish Cleric, and a Psion?
Baseball is meant to be played on a regulation baseball diamond, of very specific sizes. Am I wrong to play with my friends in my backyard?
Poker is meant to be played without any wild cards. Am I wrong to play "Eights are wild" with my friends when we're killing time?
Megaman X is meant to be played with weapons, armors, and parts. Am I wrong to challenge myself by playing with buster only?

Do you see my point?

**Freeflow44**

Elbows wrote:
Freeflow44 wrote:
You can all have your own “rules” to enjoy the hobby. You only want to play against fully painted armies on nicely built tables, fine when that person at the FLGS with a grey plastic army asks you for a game, say “No thank you” and leave it at that. Don’t go into a diatribe about the sin of grey plastic

Sure, no one disagrees with that. Did anyone here say that go on rants about it in front of people who ask them for a game? This is an internet forum, and the discussion was started...nothing wrong with people actually responding.

Agreed Elbows, you are right, we’re currently in a discussion forum and the conversation is valid.

Here’s a story, I’ve been gaming at my local GW for a year and half, always with my fully painted armies, I have a great friend there named Scott. Scott and I love the same parts of the lore, we have the same sense of humor, Scott and I always have a great laugh

But we had never played a game against each other and we kept telling each other we would sometime

I finally asked Scott why we haven’t had that game yet and he said “None of my armies are fully painted and your armies are all painted”

I was pretty surprised by this and told Scott, I don’t care if your armies painted, let’s roll some dice and have some laughs

Last Saturday, Scott’s yellow primed Imperial Fists fought my fully painted Death Guard and we had a riot

**Crimson**

I have run LARPs too and I'm an elitist gatekeeper in that too and expect people to get a somewhat setting appropriate costume! And when I GM tabletop RPGs i expect people to invent a name for their character, I even go so far in my elitist gatekeeping that I expect them to come up with rough backstory and even describe the appearance of their character!

**Elbows**

Precisely.

I have a group of 8-10 guys that I routinely game with. Of that, four of them have fully painted armies. It doesn't mean I don't play with the other guys. However I do rib the feth out of them, and push them to paint their stuff (they're just more scatterbrained and collect more minis than they'll even build, let alone paint). They're also younger and may eventually snap out of it.

The guys who really hate painting, I suggest we shift to a different skirmish-type game. We frequently have the "You know...you don't have to like or play 40K if you don't want to, it's not a requirement!" conversation.

If I host a game, be it Old West, Fantasy Dungeon Crawl, Gladiators, etc....I will provide all the painted miniatures/terrain/dice,etc. needed. They just show up and bring a beer or two.

JNA may hate what I have to say in this thread, he may even be insulted; but the reality is that's fine; he can be insulted. We're not gaming together. We're simply discussing opinions on the matter. The beauty of being an adult is that you get to decide how/where/why you play games. I fervently dislike the common "game at all costs" attitude that some people have. I have limited free time as an adult, so I will play the games I want to play with the people I want to play with. I'm not required nor interested in going and playing random strangers at hobby stores, etc.

**ccs**

small_gods wrote:

If people bring a sea of grey plastic every game then they are the wrong people to play against.

They are? So I'm doing this wrong by playing with my friends?
Let me consider this for a moment....

Hmm, nope. Friendship is thicker than paint. Removed - Rule #1 please

small_gods wrote:
Part of the game is about the visuals of the battlefield and if you make no effort to paint your minis then you are making no effort to improve your opponents experience. I can understand not having time to paint a lot of new minis at once but if you never paint then you're in the wrong hobby.

And a more important part of this game is having a good time with the people around your table.
Seriously, wether or not Joel ever paints those Marines isn't going improve my play experience with him.

**Arcanis161**

Can we just say that people should find and game with others of a similar mindset?

If you don't mind gaming with or against unpainted minis, then find people who also don't mind either?

Or if you prefer playing against those with fully painted armies, then find those who have fully painted armies?

And seriously, why are we arguing this on an internet forum? It'll be a rare day that any of us will meet each other IRL, and most of the people we will play against are those at our FLGS. How about we each try to find like minded folks at our own FLGS? I guarantee it will be a lot more enjoyable for everyone.

**Freeflow44**

Arcanis161 wrote:
Can we just say that people should find and game with others of a similar mindset?

If you don't mind gaming with or against unpainted minis, then find people who also don't mind either?

Or if you prefer playing against those with fully painted armies, then find those who have fully painted armies?

And seriously, why are we arguing this on an internet forum? It'll be a rare day that any of us will meet each other IRL, and most of the people we will play against are those at our FLGS. How about we each try to find like minded folks at our own FLGS? I guarantee it will be a lot more enjoyable for everyone.

Ding! Ding! Ding! And that is all there is too it

**Gangland**

My friends and I started the hobby (one restarted from scratch) about 3 years ago. We started with about 500pt armies and what little terrain we had/a lot of makeshift terrain. After visiting and playing at a game store we were spoiled and the makeshift terrain didn't cut it. Also we all.grew our armies and have around 3.5k for multiple armies. Fully painted armies and terrain always looks better and is preferred but we do play with unpainted/primed models.

**ValentineGames**

If you wanna play with unpainted miniatures forever because you can't grasp what wargaming is you should play Manopoly or Risk.

**tauist**

In theory, I emphasize good looking table and terrain over model painting quality. Even basecoated models look pretty aight when there's many of them, but a half-arsed table and terrain will look comical no matter how well its painted. Badly made / goofy looking terrain and tables seems to be much more prevalent, I rarely see good looking tables whereas decent to awesome looking armies are much more common. This hobby would benefit from realistic diorama building tutorials becoming trendy (youtubers hint hint).

In practice however, I dont really GAF. We are there to play and have fun with the mates, not one-upping each other on mini painting skills or terrain building.

**BrianDavion**

Crimson wrote:
The contrast paints are bloody amazing. They look pretty damn good without any extra highlights or shadowing (which I obviously do add, but that is the optional step.)

how well they work depends on what your painting, they don't work all that great on primaris, although the new apoacathy white is definatly a god send for ayone wanting to do white

**Nitro Zeus**

I at the very least get the base colors on before playing anything. Ideally, fully painted (to my own standard). What I consider fully painted for a Termagant may differ to what I consider fully painted for a Hierodule, but at the very least they are all finished in my eyes.

**Mmmpi**

Elbows wrote:
Sure, but that's leaning toward the common misconception of "It's your hobby". This rings true when you're buying your miniatures, and painting your miniatures, and if you game alone or solo, etc.

The second you put your miniatures onto a table with an opponent or opponents, it becomes "our hobby", and you're now providing your portion of the entertainment value. For many people (including many of those who insist it's not...) painted miniatures and proper terrain is the predominant reason they play tabletop wargames. A good looking and enjoyable game is a cooperative affair, nothing less. Each player is bringing a portion of the game with them. This includes their attitude, their rules knowledge, their models and miniatures representing their force, and yes, their element of the aesthetic of the game.

If you don't care at all about the aesthetic of the game, you're in a very small minority. If you find other people who don't care about the aesthetics of the game, congrats. You've reached a great gaming milestone; finding likeminded individuals to play with.

No one looks at a game with grey miniatures running around unpainted MDF and says "hell yeah, that's awesome, I want to do that!". We see White Dwarf articles and pictures on forums of beautiful games, and that's what drives the wargaming hobby; enthusiasm for "the beautiful game" if you will.

If you think people who want to enjoy a more fulfilling hobby experience are elitists or gatekeepers or (insert other yawn-inducing internet terms...) you're welcome to believe that. No one needs to apologize for liking nice things. I had a fully painted (albeit small, perhaps 1,200 points by today's values) Eldar army in high school...on a high school budget, with high school skills. I played on a table made from a huge plank of grey drywall I spray-painted green...IN HIGH SCHOOL.

Spoiler:

If you're an adult there's little to zero excuse to not put some effort into painting your gak. It's not the community's job to baby you and coddle you because you're not interested in putting in effort. That's a decision you make.

"Our" still includes them though. While there are many people who paint as part of the hobby, there are many who don't, who enjoy the playing aspect more. Or have time issues. So yeah...and adult has many issues that may be stopping them from painting, or painting regularly. Acknowledging that isn't babying or coddling.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

JNAProductions wrote:
Elbows wrote:
That quote didn't say anything about how you enjoy your hobby. He said he didn't understand why people do that. He also presents some valid points; if painting isn't an interest - why bother with tabletop wargames when other games exist that aren't based around building a 3D aesthetic simulation?

He believe it to be lazy, and that's a pretty valid argument with the ease with which you can paint armies today. I don't know the author of that post, but I'm inclined to agree with him. I don't understand why someone would get joy out of unpainted models and sub-par terrain; but that doesn't equate to it being wrong, if it's something you're doing by yourself. I do get a say in the matter when the game occurs between us though, thus I can decline the game if desired.
Do you not see the insulting nature of the post?

At this point it's safe to assume he does not, considering he's said things on par.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crimson wrote:
I have run LARPs too and I'm an elitist gatekeeper in that too and expect people to get a somewhat setting appropriate costume! And when I GM tabletop RPGs i expect people to invent a name for their character, I even go so far in my elitist gatekeeping that I expect them to come up with rough backstory and even describe the appearance of their character!

It's almost like different hobbies can have different standards.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Arcanis161 wrote:
Can we just say that people should find and game with others of a similar mindset?

If you don't mind gaming with or against unpainted minis, then find people who also don't mind either?

Or if you prefer playing against those with fully painted armies, then find those who have fully painted armies?

And seriously, why are we arguing this on an internet forum? It'll be a rare day that any of us will meet each other IRL, and most of the people we will play against are those at our FLGS. How about we each try to find like minded folks at our own FLGS? I guarantee it will be a lot more enjoyable for everyone.

One side is saying that. The othe rside is saying the first is lazy because they don't hold others to made up standards.

**Argive**

Stormonu wrote:
Moriarty wrote:
Argive wrote:
I mean who does not like the feeling of debuting a polished fresh new addition to their army

And then watching it die/run without doing anything :-)

My brother actually used that as an argument not to paint. His painted models (units) always seemed to die first. He was convinced the “ugly” unpainted models were subconsciously not being picked over the “attractive” painted ones.

New model syndrome is certainly a real phenomenon

First time I used a wraithlord he did not hit anything the entire game.
Then first time I used Eldrad he tanked almost a whole line of broadsides and proceeded to kill two units of fire warriors

TheAvengingKnee wrote:
Strg Alt wrote:
It's the most important aspect. Period.

I don't understand why people even bother shoving minis around the board with unpainted stuff. Hmm, it seems to me these are the same people who are okay with putting soda cans on the table as terrain or even, God forbid, models.

A better hobby would be for them MtG but as lazy as these guys are they wouldn't even take an effort to put their cards into sleeves.

If it’s a new player putting an army on the field they have just assembled and haven’t had time to paint, I can completely understand an excitement for getting in a game with new models. Also this time of year in South Dakota I understand people not painting minis, if you don’t have a warm area to prime you can’t go outside and do it. At the flgs there is a guy who if the models don’t come painted when he buys them they will never be painted, that is a lot less acceptable and he sometimes is a tfg.

Stormonu wrote:
Moriarty wrote:
Argive wrote:
I mean who does not like the feeling of debuting a polished fresh new addition to their army

And then watching it die/run without doing anything :-)

My brother actually used that as an argument not to paint. His painted models (units) always seemed to die first. He was convinced the “ugly” unpainted models were subconsciously not being picked over the “attractive” painted ones.

We had a tournament with some grey plastic terrain and an unpainted squad of cultists sat in the terrain and both sides forgot they existed until the end of the game.

Last time I played vs a bunch of grey models I almost lost because I forgot about to shoot at enemy character. We played on a gray board with a lot of grey/ash coloured terrain and he was standing right in the open and I just didn't see him lol...

**AegisGrimm**

I will play a game using unpainted miniatures, especially if I am demoing a game to someone, but only if I REALLY want to get a game in but don't have all the figures present painted yet. But it still grates on my nerves.

I prefer my games to be with fully painted figures around fully painted terrain when at all possible, and sometimes I'd rather just pospone until that can be done because it makes the game that much cooler for me. For me personally that's what elevates miniatures wargames above boardgames. Boardgames are meant to be played with what comes out of the box. With wargames, the entire POINT is to make the army or force I am fielding completely unique to ME, not just anyone else with money and glue. It's ALL about the personalization.

**TonyH122**

If I've got some mates, a beer, a stick, and a tennis ball, I've got a game of backyard cricket.

Same principle applies to 40k. Fun is necessary, everything else is ancillary.

**Not Online!!!**

Important out of suffering is missing.

What i mean by that is, I love to paint but also loathe to paint at the same time.

**Crimson**

Mmmpi wrote:
It's almost like different hobbies can have different standards.

It almost like some people take upholding any sorts of standards as a personal insult.

**Mmmpi**

Crimson wrote:
Mmmpi wrote:
It's almost like different hobbies can have different standards.

It almost like some people take upholding any sorts of standards as a personal insult.

It is an insult when you force your standards onto other people.

You holding yourself to a 'only painted' standard? Fine. Admirable.

Calling people lazy because they don't meet your particular standards? And for a wide variety or reasons that likely have nothing to do with painting one way or another? Yeah, No Buenos.

**Crimson**

Mmmpi wrote:

It is an insult when you force your standards onto other people.

You holding yourself to a 'only painted' standard? Fine. Admirable.

Calling people lazy because they don't meet your particular standards? And for a wide variety or reasons that likely have nothing to do with painting one way or another? Yeah, No Buenos.

I didn't call anyone lazy, but just like LARPS, tabletop RPGs and historical reenactment I mentioned earlier, wargaming is a group activity and you not meeting the standards affects others and it is understandable if they don't want to include you if you don't want to put in the expected effort.

**Shuma-Gorath**

Having done this hobby since the early 90s I have played with unpainted, partially painted and fully painted armies and or gangs/warbands.

What I have found is when I was younger I was always super keen to get gaming not really caring if most of the battlefield was a sea of grey or metal. Much more interested in making army lists or seeing if the latest unit was good or not.

Now i’m older I much prefer the painting and converting aspect of the hobby, as I have more downtime and less time to actually game. Also with the rise of internet video it is much easier to see how painting techniques are done rather than relying on a few Mike McVey photos and text.

Is Painting Important; it is purely dependant on a person to person basis. For me it is as I enjoy it even if my skill at it is never going to be that good.

**Mmmpi**

Crimson wrote:
Mmmpi wrote:

It is an insult when you force your standards onto other people.

You holding yourself to a 'only painted' standard? Fine. Admirable.

Calling people lazy because they don't meet your particular standards? And for a wide variety or reasons that likely have nothing to do with painting one way or another? Yeah, No Buenos.

I didn't call anyone lazy, but just like LARPS, tabletop RPGs and historical reenactment I mentioned earlier, wargaming is a group activity and you not meeting the standards affects others and it is understandable if they don't want to include you if you don't want to put in the expected effort.

Just because you didn't say the specific words "they're lazy" doesn't mean your post wasn't saying it.

The minimum group standard for Larping and reenactments involves the pagentry. The minimum group standard for playing 40K is "wants to play 40K". As for the rest, sure if your group wants to exclude people who don't paint, that's your business. Just don't pretend your way is the only acceptable way to do it. Remember too, if you're part of a larger group, their desire or inability to not paint is just as much a part of what your group finds acceptable.

**Crimson**

Mmmpi wrote:

The minimum group standard for Larping and reenactments involves the pagentry.

And why you find this acceptable and not elitist gatekeeping? It is the fething same thing. Sure, you could do a fantasy LARP in your jeans, it still works, just like you can play with unpainted 40K models. It just looks like gak and the breaks immersion. And in both of these putting some effort into the visuals is what is expected. GW always shows painted armies and in historical wargaming people wouldn't dream of playing with unpainted models. I really don't understand why this phenomenon even exists, seem to be mostly just a Warhammer and fantasy wargaming problem.

**LoftyS**

I used to only barely care enough to get a squad done in a month. But I had to have my models at least primed.

Took a break for a few years, came back and somehow a switch had been flipped in the meantime, now I want my models painted ASAP, within aesthetic reason.

I also somehow got better at painting while being away from the hobby. It's honestly kind of creeping me out, it's as if I was possessed and did hobbying unbeknownst to me at some point.

That said, painting is not the most fun part of 40K. Playing is. And I'll often bring a basecoated unit or two for a test run to figure out where it'll go on my "painting priority ladder".

**Mmmpi**

Crimson wrote:
Mmmpi wrote:

The minimum group standard for Larping and reenactments involves the pagentry.

And why you find this acceptable and not elitist gatekeeping? It is the fething same thing. Sure, you could do a fantasy LARP in your jeans, it still works, just like you can play with unpainted 40K models. It just looks like gak and the breaks immersion. And in both of these putting some effort into the visuals is what is expected. GW always shows painted armies and in historical wargaming people wouldn't dream of playing with unpainted models. I really don't understand why this phenomenon even exists, seem to be mostly just a Warhammer and fantasy wargaming problem.

Wait...Me telling you that you your pushing your standards onto other people is me gatekeeping, despite me saying that I have no issues with what standards you hold yourself to?

Oh wait...that's not the same thing at all.

You think it looks like gak. Maybe the person you're playing with agrees with you. Maybe they don't care. It's none of your business. You don't have to play them, but if you do, you have to live with it.
40K rules break immersion much more than a lack of paint does. You expect 'extra' effort. Other people might not. Again, that's you pushing your values onto them as some arbetrary limiter on 'what's acceptable'. It has as much berring on the game as if I refused to play you because you drove a Honda to the game.

GW shows painted armies because they want to sell miniatures. Cool pictures sell well. Historical wargaming isn't 40K. Lets compare apples to apples, not apples to dachshunds.

The reason you don't understand is that you're trying your hardest not to understand. You've decided that your way is the best, and that anyone who thinks otherwise is lazy.

**ValentineGames**

text removed.

Reds8n