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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Get it through your skull:

Some people hate painting.
Some people are bad at painting, so don't want to do it.
Some people have unsteady hands/are colourblind/have bad eye-sight.

No one should suffer in game because of ANY of the above. How the feth don't you people get this???

And not painting your models obfuscates information slowing the game and makes it easier for some players to cheat.

We can go round this bush all day. There are points on both sides.

Now PERSONALLY I'd only push this rule on TFG because screw that guy. I was just having a laugh about the fact the people being the loudest about this likely don't paint their armies.

Wait, am I late, or have foljs not seen the full rules book? Are we complaining aboit paint because we've all already gone thru the rules?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What if the painting award at a tournament had a "winning games" condition. That wouldn't make any sense, would it?

Exactly this.

https://imgur.com/a/J4Bygoq ?

the_scotsman wrote:
Wait, am I late, or have foljs not seen the full rules book? Are we complaining aboit paint because we've all already gone thru the rules?

Yes, we've gone through the rules. That's why we're discussing paint. It's in the rules now.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
And not painting your models obfuscates information slowing the game and makes it easier for some players to cheat.

Bull gak. That is absolute nonsense.

Unpainted models "obscure things" my ass.

 Sasori wrote:
You're going way over the top.

How are any of the examples I gave over the top? My frustration is because people don't seem to understand why winning games based not on what happened in the game but because someone painted their models is fething slowed.

Also flip this to this:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What if the painting award at a tournament had a "winning games" condition. That wouldn't make any sense, would it?

I mean, can you imagine if you had a wonderfully painted army, but lost the painting award at a tournament because you didn't score enough Battle Points during games. You'd be LIVID, because what the feth as your in-game results got to do with being the best painter.

Same applies to this nonsense rule.

the_scotsman wrote:
https://imgur.com/a/J4Bygoq ?

Here is a recap of big changes that we've noticed so far:

Melee units can only fight if they are within Engagement Range or within 1/2" of a friendly model that, is itself, within 1/2" of an enemy model (isn't that the same thing?)

You must maintain coherency after a Pile-In.

Attack Sequence change in that you must continue to allocate attacks to the same model until it is dead. No spreading around allocation of wounds to different models.

To Hit and To Wound are both capped at -1/+1

Insane Bravery is once PER BATTLE

Command Re-roll is the entire test, not just one dice. And they can only be used on certain things:
-Armor Saves
-To Wound
-To Hit
-Damage
-Advance
-Charge
-Psychic test
-Deny the witch
-Number of attacks from a weapon

Units can target other units that heroically intervened this turn.

All specialist detachments (Spearhead, Vanguard, Outrider) cost 3CP. There doesn't appear to be an Airwing Detachment.

Aircraft cannot be move-blocked. If they cannot move, they enter reserve.

There are rules for objective markers.

Mission points are 45 for Primary, 45 for Secondary and 10 for having your army painted for 100 pts. per mission.

You can fall back into a transport.

Weapons are based on unit movement, not model movement.

Storm Shields now are 4++ and +1 to the model's Sv characteristic.

Plasma kills on an UNMODIFIED 1.

Deny the Witch doesn't appear to have a range.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
And not painting your models obfuscates information slowing the game and makes it easier for some players to cheat.

Bull gak. That is absolute nonsense.

Unpainted models "obscure things" my ass.

See my above example of the unpainted Intercessors.

And "bullgak" isn't an arguement.

 Castozor wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Get it through your skull:

Some people hate painting.
Some people are bad at painting, so don't want to do it.
Some people have unsteady hands/are colourblind/have bad eye-sight.

No one should suffer in game because of ANY of the above. How the feth don't you people get this???

You're going way over the top. If you and a person in the store can't agree for something simple like this for a casual pick up game, then there are other problems at play.

Maybe yes, maybe no. His point that this should never be part of the core rules is valid. It just invites unnecessary arguments for nor reason.

What if I don't like assembling minis either? Can I show up with boxes and sprues to prove I have the models and just slide bases?

Deleted.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Now PERSONALLY I'd only push this rule on TFG because screw that guy. I was just having a laugh about the fact the people being the loudest about this likely don't paint their armies.

Yeah, and it can be amusing.

I guess I'll see what the local guys think of it. Just to see who's going to push it and who wont.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here.

First time you lose a game not because of anything you or your opponent did during the game but because you didn't have a painted army come back and say that again.

I imagine he'll be too occupied trying to dampen the frothing rage and stem the endless stream of tears that resulted from losing a game not because of anything him or his opponent did in game to get back to you with your reply.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Castozor wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Get it through your skull:

Some people hate painting.
Some people are bad at painting, so don't want to do it.
Some people have unsteady hands/are colourblind/have bad eye-sight.

No one should suffer in game because of ANY of the above. How the feth don't you people get this???

You're going way over the top. If you and a person in the store can't agree for something simple like this for a casual pick up game, then there are other problems at play.

Maybe yes, maybe no. His point that this should never be part of the core rules is valid. It just invites unnecessary arguments for nor reason.

What if I don't like assembling minis either? Can I show up with boxes and sprues to prove I have the models and just slide bases?

Except TRUE LOS is a part of the rules so you have to assemble them for that reason alone. You are putting up a straw man, now you could argue painting is now a part of the rules but unlike LOS it has no real impact on how the game is played. If you enjoy getting free points for being a bad player, power to you but I would never play that way.

I have a tremor that makes it hard for me to paint details well. It doesn't matter, the 10 points isn't for having a pretty army, it's just for having a painted army.

All you need to do is spray on a base color, paint a couple areas of the model a different color (on a space marine, paint the gun metal colored and say the helmet another color), wash the entire model with the same wash, and then put some texture paint on the base. It's like 5 minutes per model plus paint drying time.

I don't think giving points for it is a great idea, but just putting some perspective here. If you just want to do the minimum to get the points and the people you play with really care about it...you can do it in a couple hours for your whole army.

 Castozor wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Castozor wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Get it through your skull:

Some people hate painting.
Some people are bad at painting, so don't want to do it.
Some people have unsteady hands/are colourblind/have bad eye-sight.

No one should suffer in game because of ANY of the above. How the feth don't you people get this???

You're going way over the top. If you and a person in the store can't agree for something simple like this for a casual pick up game, then there are other problems at play.

Maybe yes, maybe no. His point that this should never be part of the core rules is valid. It just invites unnecessary arguments for nor reason.

What if I don't like assembling minis either? Can I show up with boxes and sprues to prove I have the models and just slide bases?

Except TRUE LOS is a part of the rules so you have to assemble them for that reason alone. You are putting up a straw man, now you could argue painting is now a part of the rules but unlike LOS it has no real impact on how the game is played. If you enjoy getting free points for being a bad player, power to you but I would never play that way.

And it's hard to determine TLOS through intervening models and terrain when an entire army is grey plastic.

You think there's any possibility that GW either knows or condones this leak? The album is still up, which is surprising, and it could be a good move considering all the vitriol on the interwebs today about them not releasing a rulebook alongside Indomitus at launch.

 Red Corsair wrote:
What if I don't like assembling minis either? Can I show up with boxes and sprues to prove I have the models and just slide bases?

That would prevent the game from being played. Painting your miniatures does not.

And again, what it a tournament's painting prize had a "how many games you won" requirement. Would that be fair?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
And "bullgak" isn't an arguement.

Neither is anything you've said so far, so, call it even?

The winner of a game should be determined by the actions taken by the players during that game. I don't understand why you are having such a massive time not understanding this.

You. Should. Not. Win. A. Game. Because. You. Painted. Your. Miniatures.

yukishiro1 wrote:
I have a tremor that makes it hard for me to paint details well. It doesn't matter, the 10 points isn't for having a pretty army, it's just for having a painted army.

All you need to do is spray on a base color, paint a couple areas of the model a different color (on a space marine, paint the gun metal colored and say the helmet another color), wash the entire model with the same wash, and then put some texture paint on the base. It's like 5 minutes per model plus paint drying time.

I don't think giving points for it is a great idea, but just putting some perspective here. If you just want to do the minimum to get the points and the people you play with really care about it...you can do it in a couple hours for your whole army.

It's no different then proxying or playing with partially assembled models. Paying someone else to paint their stuff is also an option, but whenever that gets mentioned the argument always becomes about the cost. Despite the fact I already pointed out the game is heavily tilted toward pay to play to begin with. Notice they all ignored that when I brought it up?

Ill ask again, why should a player have an edge because he or she can afford to latest and greatest units or army when others can't?

A person with that 'edge' would still end up losing if they weren't painted.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A person with that 'edge' would still end up losing if they weren't painted.

I mean, not really. It's 10 points, not 50. If we both scored all of our primaries and I scored one of my secondaries to the max and you scored three, I'd still lose to you, even with a painted army.

 puma713 wrote:
Deny the Witch doesn't appear to have a range.

DTW has a range of 24". It is buried in the paragraph at the top of the same page as the Deny the Witch procedure.

 puma713 wrote:
I mean, not really. It's 10 points, not 50. If we both scored all of our primaries and I scored one of my secondaries to the max and you scored three, I'd still lose to you, even with a painted army.

Doesn't matter if it's 1 point or 99 points. The events of the game should determine who wins, not whether the minis are painted.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
What if I don't like assembling minis either? Can I show up with boxes and sprues to prove I have the models and just slide bases?

That would prevent the game from being played. Painting your miniatures does not.

And again, what it a tournament's painting prize had a "how many games you won" requirement. Would that be fair?

Sure because it would be applied to everyone that entered.

How is this hard to grasp?

Go figure a game that revolves around playing with hobby kits that require assembly and painting would expect you to do just that. BTW, no where does it say you can't play or are penalized. You just miss out on that juicy carrot.

I don't have 20/20 vision, I also hate wearing glasses and contact lenses but if I enter an archery contest you can bet I'll suck it up and wear them or miss out on points. I won't expect the event give me a handicap on points because I'm an entitled brat.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
I mean, not really. It's 10 points, not 50. If we both scored all of our primaries and I scored one of my secondaries to the max and you scored three, I'd still lose to you, even with a painted army.

Doesn't matter if it's 1 point or 99 points. The events of the game should determine who wins, not whether the minis are painted.

I get it. I understand your point completely. But you've been describing a scenario where you auto-lose if you show up with a grey army, which is not true. You're just at a disadvantage, warranted or not.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Castozor wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Get it through your skull:

Some people hate painting.
Some people are bad at painting, so don't want to do it.
Some people have unsteady hands/are colourblind/have bad eye-sight.

No one should suffer in game because of ANY of the above. How the feth don't you people get this???

You're going way over the top. If you and a person in the store can't agree for something simple like this for a casual pick up game, then there are other problems at play.

Maybe yes, maybe no. His point that this should never be part of the core rules is valid. It just invites unnecessary arguments for nor reason.

What if I don't like assembling minis either? Can I show up with boxes and sprues to prove I have the models and just slide bases?

I have played against and seen people play with all types of proxies and even empty bases in friendly pick up games. Once back in 5th ed a local SM player wanted to try a drop pod heavy list so they bought a 12 pack of coke and used the cans as the drop pods. I have also played in an apoc game were a nid player used children's toys to proxy biotitans. None of this would be allowed at tournaments and that is totally fine. Casual pick up game at stores have always been more lax on stuff like this.

Should we bring over other tournament requirements to matched play (which is the standard pickup game format that people use) and put them in the core rules?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A person with that 'edge' would still end up losing if they weren't painted.

Notice you had to dodge the question rather then address my point honestly.

Both players have painted or unpainted armies. One can afford more kits. the other can't. Tell me how that is any more fair when the guy with greater purchasing power wins?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
I mean, not really. It's 10 points, not 50. If we both scored all of our primaries and I scored one of my secondaries to the max and you scored three, I'd still lose to you, even with a painted army.

Doesn't matter if it's 1 point or 99 points. The events of the game should determine who wins, not whether the minis are painted.

That's not what you said in the post he replied to though. You talked about how someone with the ability to build the most top meta list (Economic Advantage) would still lose, and he pointed out that is very likely not the case.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Sure because it would be applied to everyone that entered.

That makes zero sense. A painting prize should be determined by, wait for it, painting. If someone won a painting competition because they won more games there'd be a frickin' riot.

 Red Corsair wrote:
How is this hard to grasp?

That's what I've been asking.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Go figure a game that revolves around playing with hobby kits that require assembly and painting would expect you to do just that. BTW, no where does it say you can't play or are penalized. You just miss out on that juicy carrot.

Require assembly yes, because the games rules require LOS checks and the ability to see what a mini is armed with. Painting doesn't stop either of those.

And it is a penalty. It's saying your opponent wins more because they painted their army, not because of anything they did during the game. You are losing a game because of nothing you did during the game.

 Red Corsair wrote:
I don't have 20/20 vision, I also hate wearing glasses and contact lenses but if I enter an archery contest you can bet I'll suck it up and wear them or miss out on points.

I won't expect the event give me a handicap on points because I'm an entitled brat.

Painting has never been a requirement of the game. Being accurate in an archery contest is. Your analogy is horrific.

I think for a lot of people this could be a positive thing if they could use it to get over the anxiety that comes with the idea of painting. In my experience, a lot of the reason people don't paint is because they're afraid of not doing a good job and being embarrassed about it. So they prefer to leave their models unpainted; if you aren't painting at all, you aren't putting yourself out there.

But if you need to paint to get the points...there's your excuse. "I didn't have time to do this well so I did it the fast way, it's not pretty but it works and fits the rule."

And some portion of those people might even realize that hey...they actually like painting, once they're freed of the obligation of feeling like they have to do it to a level they aren't capable of.

I know because I used to be in the same boat. I never painted my models when I was a kid. When I came back in 8th after a 15 year break, I started painting just for a lark...and discovered I actually like it. My models aren't pretty in a technical sense - I have a tremor that makes it hard to hit details well, and I'm just not that artistically talented anyway - but they're a hell of a lot prettier than the grey plastic. And I've discovered I actually like painting, once I let go of the need to feel it had to be perfect. I've even got complements on my quin army from people - not on a technical level, but on a "wow, that's a really cool painting scheme, I've never seen that particular combination before" which has been very satisfying.

 Sasori wrote:
That's not what you said in the post he replied to though. You talked about how someone with the ability to build the most top meta list (Economic Advantage) would still lose, and he pointed out that is very likely not the case.

Complete conjecture as to what "edge" that would be. It's a nebulous concept. What I said is that someone who has the "edge" can still lose because they didn't paint said units.

The overall point is that you can lose games because of nothing you (or your opponent) did during the game.

That'd be like taking a few strokes off someone's golf score during a major because of the colour of shoes you wore.