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.

Blastaar wrote:
How the hell has this thread reached 32 pages? The constant arguing in this thread is Exhibit A for why this rule shouldn't exist.

Those of you actually arguing that your opponent has an obligation to paint their minis to make you happy are selfish. It is no-one's damn business what someone does with their own minis.

This is very true, but the person with the painted army is more likely to win the game still. But like i said earlier, that's only a problem based on what you consider important to you.

Likewise people in here are pretending that you can't talk to your opponent about the rule or that it's law. They also seem to think being 10 points down potentially assuming they don't talk to their opponent, results in a loss before even trying.

Blastaar wrote:
The constant arguing in this thread is Exhibit A for why this rule shouldn't exist.

This is exactly right, except it’s not just this thread, it’s a hundred threads over a dozen years.

While I don't play with or against unpainted armies if I have the choice, I think it is a stupid rule because having a painted or unpainted army should not have any effect on the result of the game. On the other hand, if I am attending a tournament I agree on whatever rules they have and if I am playing an one-off game, the result of the game is irrelevant so I don't have an issue with the rule.

If this results in more players painting their armies, good. If this results in tournaments allowing unpainted armies, not good.

jullevi wrote:
if I am playing an one-off game, the result of the game is irrelevant so I don't have an issue with the rule.

I think this shows one of the biggest disconnects between people who are against rule and people who either like it or don't care particularly. Because I get that the outcome of the game doesn't *really* matter, and it's not worth losing friends over, it's important to have fun, DBAD etc etc, but at the end of the day you're *still* playing a game where you try to make decisions in order to gain a victory, so any rule that awards points arbitrarily just sticks in my craw. If the result of the game is irrelevant, you'd be OK with a rule stating that Space Marines get an extra 50 VP automatically then? After all, who cares if they win, it doesn't matter who wins? And if people don't like that rule they can just house-rule it away, so the rule's fine then?

Twilight Pathways wrote:

jullevi wrote:
if I am playing an one-off game, the result of the game is irrelevant so I don't have an issue with the rule.

I think this shows one of the biggest disconnects between people who are against rule and people who either like it or don't care particularly. Because I get that the outcome of the game doesn't *really* matter, and it's not worth losing friends over, it's important to have fun, DBAD etc etc, but at the end of the day you're *still* playing a game where you try to make decisions in order to gain a victory, so any rule that awards points arbitrarily just sticks in my craw. If the result of the game is irrelevant, you'd be OK with a rule stating that Space Marines get an extra 50 VP automatically then? After all, who cares if they win, it doesn't matter who wins? And if people don't like that rule they can just house-rule it away, so the rule's fine then?

It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

 Kithail wrote:
It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

The vast majority of the people unhappy with this rule in this thread did not "decide" to not paint their minis. Painting requires skill, patience and time. You have limited influence on how much of those you have.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kithail wrote:
It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

The vast majority of the people unhappy with this rule in this thread did not "decide" to not paint their minis. Painting requires skill, patience and time. You have limited influence on how much of those you have.

Playing and winning games do not require skill patience and time I take it?

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kithail wrote:
It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

The vast majority of the people unhappy with this rule in this thread did not "decide" to not paint their minis. Painting requires skill, patience and time. You have limited influence on how much of those you have.

Putting some block basecoats on to comply with the rule takes little time, going back over them to do the details and make them look nice requires skill, patience and time.

Battle ready minus base apparently in 10 mins:


Technically battle ready, can't take too long:


Also would constitute battle ready with some basing:


It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

Twilight Pathways wrote:
And if people don't like that rule they can just house-rule it away, so the rule's fine then?

I didn't say the rule is fine. I said that it is stupid and shouldn't exist because having model painted should have no effect on the game and it causes arguments such as this thread.

I said I don't care because the rule as no impact on any games I may play. If it encourages people to paint their armies it will get thumbs up from me. But it is still a stupid rule.

 Kithail wrote:
Playing and winning games do not require skill patience and time I take it?

If winning games would make you a faster painter, I would not be having this conversion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
Also would constitute battle ready with some basing:

Spoiler:

It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

Ruining a unit of my miniatures like that would probably still take me two weeks. Meanwhile, my spouse paints a full unit of highly detailed genestealers in the same time.

Skill and ability doesn't just make models beautiful, they also decides how fast you can paint.

It's odd how telling people how to enjoy their hobby suddenly becomes okay when it comes to painting.

You are playing a game that includes assembling and painting your models.

Why are we all in agreement that you should assemble your models (unless someone is playing with sprues glued to bases?) and not with painting them?

I also like tournaments where they include sportmanship points, nothing to do with skill in the game, it's not a big part, but it counts towards winning the tournament, great.

If you want to play a try-out game, fine if your army isn't painted. If you want to include a model to see what is does and it isn't painted yet, fine aswell.

But in the long run, the friends I play regularly against, everything is painted, which is great. Them painting their armies makes my game that much more fun.

Back to the question at hand, my opponent can choose if they want to use it, my army is fully painted.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kithail wrote:
Playing and winning games do not require skill patience and time I take it?

If winning games would make you a faster painter, I would not be having this conversion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
Also would constitute battle ready with some basing:

Spoiler:

It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

Ruining a unit of my miniatures like that would probably still take me two weeks. Meanwhile, my spouse paints a full unit of highly detailed genestealers in the same time.

Skill and ability doesn't just make models beautiful, they also decides how fast you can paint.

It's odd how telling people how to enjoy their hobby suddenly becomes okay when it comes to painting.

Nobody is telling you how to enjoy your hobby, simply that if 10 points matter to you, paint your stuff quickly and badly to get the 10 points rather than have grey plastic. Nobody claimed you should be enjoying doing that. If you enjoy winning however then arguably you are enjoying the effort you put into painting them by extension.

Dudeface wrote:
Nobody is telling you how to enjoy your hobby, simply that if 10 points matter to you, paint your stuff quickly and badly to get the 10 points rather than have grey plastic. Nobody claimed you should be enjoying doing that. If you enjoy winning however then arguably you are enjoying the effort you put into painting them by extension.

I almost definitely do not enjoy throwing paint at my models from a distance just for speeds sake. The only reason I paint at all is because I enjoy my models being painted in a way I like.
Yet, in this thread, it seems to be perfectly fine to tell people to do exactly that.
This is just the painter's version of "git gud".

This is what my "speed painted" models look like:


Still, the corresponding boyz mob (12 models) and the nob squad (5 models) each took me a week to finish.
They were fine to fulfill tournament requirements of having three paints, and from a distance most people won't even notice that they are unpainted.
They are not considered battle ready.

So much for that.

 Kithail wrote:


It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

That's wrong, it is arbitrary in the context of how 40k has worked for over three decades. 'Arbitrary: based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system'. So you could argue that it's not arbitrary because by dint of being a rule at all, it's de facto part of the 'system' and so isn't a random choice. However that's rather weak as by the same logic any random rule introduced in the game would not be arbitrary. +10 VPs if you're wearing an orange shirt? Not arbitrary, it's a rule, and you decided not to wear an orange shirt.

It would therefore make far more sense to classify this as a rule based on a 'personal whim' (well ok, it's really a 'corporate whim') as it is diametrically opposed to the established system of how 40k dispenses rewards during a game, namely that you accrue points during a game based on things that happen within the game. A blanket rule granting points based on aesthetics operates outside of that system and is therefore more comparable to a personal whim of the writer(s), who wants to encourage more painted armies, than it is to the 'system' of 40k.

As an aside, I feel like the community's heavy lean towards 'judge whether you are going to enforce this rule on a game-by-game basis, based on the disposition of your opponent and the appearance of their army', amplifies its sense of arbitrariness.

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kithail wrote:
It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

The vast majority of the people unhappy with this rule in this thread did not "decide" to not paint their minis. Painting requires skill, patience and time. You have limited influence on how much of those you have.

Putting some block basecoats on to comply with the rule takes little time, going back over them to do the details and make them look nice requires skill, patience and time.

Battle ready minus base apparently in 10 mins:

Spoiler:

Technically battle ready, can't take too long:

Spoiler:

Also would constitute battle ready with some basing:

Spoiler:

It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

Sorry, is this supposed to be an argument in favour of the rule?

Because what I'm seeing here - especially in the last two pictures - is paint jobs that are significantly more ugly than just plain, grey plastic.

Given that this is precisely the sort of painting this rule encourages, maybe those who purport to care about the image of the game should have a long, hard think about why they're so eager to defend it.

 Jidmah wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Nobody is telling you how to enjoy your hobby, simply that if 10 points matter to you, paint your stuff quickly and badly to get the 10 points rather than have grey plastic. Nobody claimed you should be enjoying doing that. If you enjoy winning however then arguably you are enjoying the effort you put into painting them by extension.

I almost definitely do not enjoy throwing paint at my models from a distance just for speeds sake. The only reason I paint at all is because I enjoy my models being painted in a way I like.
Yet, in this thread, it seems to be perfectly fine to tell people to do exactly that.
This is just the painter's version of "git gud".

This is what my "speed painted" models look like:

Spoiler:

Still, the corresponding boyz mob (12 models) and the nob squad (5 models) each took me a week to finish.
They were fine to fulfill tournament requirements of having three paints, and from a distance most people won't even notice that they are unpainted.
They are not considered battle ready.

So much for that.

At this point, I don't really understand what you're expecting. You know you can get around the rules by applying basecoats (yes it takes you a couple of weeks, but 19 models in 2 weeks isn't too bad really), that doing so doesn't stop you painting them further if desired at a later date.

Doing this will get you 10 VP against people who want to use the rule, if they don't then no dramas and if they do, it requires them to also have a painted army to have any impact. If you want the 10 points that's what you have to do, if you're not bothered by the 10 points, carry on as you are and rely on your generalship to win the day.

It's pretty clear cut, communicate with your opponent and it likely isn't a problem, if it becomes a problem you face a choice to either carry on possibly 10 points down, paint to a basic level to get them over the line or consider new techniques or paints to try and speed up such as contrast.

I'm not going to force people to play with the rule, I wouldn't turn down a game with someone that does, if I am going to use the rule I'm more concerned with progress than completeness. Is 1 more unit painted than last time? If so sure, have the points.

 vipoid wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kithail wrote:
It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

The vast majority of the people unhappy with this rule in this thread did not "decide" to not paint their minis. Painting requires skill, patience and time. You have limited influence on how much of those you have.

Putting some block basecoats on to comply with the rule takes little time, going back over them to do the details and make them look nice requires skill, patience and time.

Battle ready minus base apparently in 10 mins:

Spoiler:

Technically battle ready, can't take too long:

Spoiler:

Also would constitute battle ready with some basing:

Spoiler:

It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

Sorry, is this supposed to be an argument in favour of the rule?

Because what I'm seeing here - especially in the last two pictures - is paint jobs that are significantly more ugly than just plain, grey plastic.

Given that this is precisely the sort of painting this rule encourages, maybe those who purport to care about the image of the game should have a long, hard think about why they're so eager to defend it.

Not to mention i would much rather play someone who is enthusastic about the game, and how it plays than someone who is put off by painting rules and really not enjoying the rushed paintjob they felt obligated to get.
Our club allready held painting days, Painting Tornaments and other things to encourage painting in the hobby.

My biggist issue is how i enjoy to paint, even if it takes me so long to paint. I would rather play with a grey plastic, than rush any painting.

 vipoid wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kithail wrote:
It is not arbitrary. You decided to not paint the minis.

The vast majority of the people unhappy with this rule in this thread did not "decide" to not paint their minis. Painting requires skill, patience and time. You have limited influence on how much of those you have.

Putting some block basecoats on to comply with the rule takes little time, going back over them to do the details and make them look nice requires skill, patience and time.

Battle ready minus base apparently in 10 mins:

Spoiler:

Technically battle ready, can't take too long:

Spoiler:

Also would constitute battle ready with some basing:

Spoiler:

It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

Sorry, is this supposed to be an argument in favour of the rule?

Because what I'm seeing here - especially in the last two pictures - is paint jobs that are significantly more ugly than just plain, grey plastic.

Given that this is precisely the sort of painting this rule encourages, maybe those who purport to care about the image of the game should have a long, hard think about why they're so eager to defend it.

I'm not defending the rule, I'm disputing the argument that it's a time consuming art form to get to battle ready.

Dudeface wrote:


It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

And these

Are not "battle ready". Individually free handed personalized insignia but bare bases.

We only have the Warhammer Community article to see what's "battle ready" and those minis, besides being Necromunda, won't get me the +10. Sure you can say use common sense, but RAW they don't meet the standard. If you can say use common sense for disabilities, friendly games, new players, new units, more-detail-than-battle-ready-but - not-exactly-battle-ready, or just choose to ignore it with consent, well then it isn't a very good rule is it?

If you're honestly saying Captain STARE of the PAINTGLOB chapter are better than grey minis then you're not buying into the GW narrative of glorious looking minis make for better games.

If I'm already on a time restraint for painting why would I do it TWICE, including any time needed for stripping and re-doing? Why are you ok with haphazardly splashing paint to get ugly, mostly monochrome anyway minis? Why is that better?

The argument about building minis is relevant because of things like movement, charge distance, LOS, melee and to a degree WYSIWYG, but it has an actual effect on the game mechanics, which paint does not, yet now it can affect the outcome of the game?

On a side note I'm curious about the people with transparent Lictors and such. How much of your invisible unit must be painted to pass?

Kayback wrote:

Dudeface wrote:


It doesn't have to be pretty, skilful or detailed. It just needs some paint on there and a bit of basing material. You also don't have to paint them this way permanently, just as a temporary measure until you can go and spruce them up.

And these

Are not "battle ready". Individually free handed personalized insignia but bare bases.

We only have the Warhammer Community article to see what's "battle ready" and those minis, besides being Necromunda, won't get me the +10. Sure you can say use common sense, but RAW they don't meet the standard. If you can say use common sense for disabilities, friendly games, new players, new units, more-detail-than-battle-ready-but - not-exactly-battle-ready, or just choose to ignore it with consent, well then it isn't a very good rule is it?

If you're honestly saying Captain STARE of the PAINTGLOB chapter are better than grey minis then you're not buying into the GW narrative of glorious looking minis make for better games.

If I'm already on a time restraint for painting why would I do it TWICE, including any time needed for stripping and re-doing? Why are you ok with haphazardly splashing paint to get ugly, mostly monochrome anyway minis? Why is that better?

The argument about building minis is relevant because of things like movement, charge distance, LOS, melee and to a degree WYSIWYG, but it has an actual effect on the game mechanics, which paint does not, yet now it can affect the outcome of the game?

On a side note I'm curious about the people with transparent Lictors and such. How much of your invisible unit must be painted to pass?

It would take mere minutes to put something on those bases and poof +10 vp (although I would be fine with those personally).

Again ofc it's better to have a good looking army painted well, but if someone feels the need to be on a forum crying about they're auto losing games due to unpainted armies, like I point out, it doesnt take much to get the 10 points.

Edit: again it's convolution of pride, passion and a rule.

If the complaint is "I want the 10 points" and that's the main concern, the paint job quality is less important. Wanting a good looking army is amazing and to be celebrated, if you want to have a "battle ready army" while you do it, just put basecoats on until you have time.

Or find people who don't care.

Dudeface wrote:
I'm not defending the rule, I'm disputing the argument that it's a time consuming art form to get to battle ready.

That is defending the rule. My argument against the rule is that I do not have sufficient time and ability to paint everything to a standard that I like and am punished by losing a fair amount of games because of that.

Your argument was "well, you save time by having them look like these absolutely terrible models".

 Jidmah wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I'm not defending the rule, I'm disputing the argument that it's a time consuming art form to get to battle ready.

That is defending the rule. My argument against the rule is that I do not have sufficient time and ability to paint everything to a standard that I like and am punished by losing a fair amount of games because of that.

Your argument was "well, you save time by having them look like these absolutely terrible models".

Yes it was, because if your need for the 10 points exceeds your ability to paint to a nice standard quickly, that's one of your options. They're not forbidding you from playing with unpainted minis, you can play without.

I think the rules intent is good but it's poorly implemented on a fundamental level, but we're all people and apply common sense to find happy mediums.

I guess some of you guys better just get used to being punished then. Or negotiate with your game group to houserule. Just keep that in mind next time I discuss houserules sometime in the future and you come launching off of your tree to give me nine shades of hell for playing houserules.

 Crimson wrote:

Consider it balancing the reaction time advantage in meta chasing that skipping the painting gives.

the tournament meta chasers already either
A : fully primed + drybrushed armies, which looked like crap
B : commissionned someone to paint their armies.

This rule doesn't fix that

You know, after hearing over and over and over from just a few people... the same names... about "woe is me", "you play my way or the highway" type attitudes...

I'm probably going to be MORE in favor of enforcing this.

Just listening to the mental gymnastics to keep sandbagging picking up the brush and doing the job is like listening to my kid go on for a hour about how he already took out the trash while standing beside a full trash can.

Sure, we can argue for a hour. I got nothing better to do. But it doesn't change the fact that he still gotta take out the trash. That trashcan is still full. And he's still not getting that reward for his chores in any event because the job isn't done to completion.

That's pretty much what we got going on here, and that attitude of "minimal effort" is why this rule got put into the book. It is why parents put rules in place for their children. I could encourage my kids until I am blue in the face and promising them a billion dollars to take a shower every night. Sometimes a finger wagging and enforcing a standard is what it takes.

GW has been on people for YEARS to paint their stuff. It is why they had those painting contests and escalation leagues and entry barriers. That was them politely asking you to just do it. Now they're practically flat out telling you. And good on them, because some people are just too lazy to do the extra work. And the best part is... my army is nearly painted (basically replaced all of my metal sisters with plastic ones), and "those same people" fussing here are no closer to meeting any standard. I'll happily take my VPs.

Thanks for getting me off that fence, guys! Fully embracing the suck

Dudeface wrote:

It would take mere minutes to put something on those bases and poof +10 vp

What if you prefer them the way they are?

vipoid wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

It would take mere minutes to put something on those bases and poof +10 vp

What if you prefer them the way they are?

Dudeface wrote:


It would take mere minutes to put something on those bases and poof +10 vp (although I would be fine with those personally).

I'd already answered for myself (thanks for the selective editing) but by the book you lose 10vp.

 vipoid wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

It would take mere minutes to put something on those bases and poof +10 vp

What if you prefer them the way they are?

Then by the rules you're 10 VP down unless you and your opponent agree to not enforce it since the base is specifically called out as being part of "Battle Ready".

Purifying Tempest wrote:
You know, after hearing over and over and over from just a few people... the same names... about "woe is me", "you play my way or the highway" type attitudes...

I'm probably going to be MORE in favor of enforcing this.

Just listening to the mental gymnastics to keep sandbagging picking up the brush and doing the job is like listening to my kid go on for a hour about how he already took out the trash while standing beside a full trash can.

Sure, we can argue for a hour. I got nothing better to do. But it doesn't change the fact that he still gotta take out the trash. That trashcan is still full. And he's still not getting that reward for his chores in any event because the job isn't done to completion.

That's pretty much what we got going on here, and that attitude of "minimal effort" is why this rule got put into the book. It is why parents put rules in place for their children. I could encourage my kids until I am blue in the face and promising them a billion dollars to take a shower every night. Sometimes a finger wagging and enforcing a standard is what it takes.

GW has been on people for YEARS to paint their stuff. It is why they had those painting contests and escalation leagues and entry barriers. That was them politely asking you to just do it. Now they're practically flat out telling you. And good on them, because some people are just too lazy to do the extra work. And the best part is... my army is nearly painted (basically replaced all of my metal sisters with plastic ones), and "those same people" fussing here are no closer to meeting any standard. I'll happily take my VPs.

Thanks for getting me off that fence, guys! Fully embracing the suck

Considering your last responce to me. I think you are the one that is simply Dismissive of others thoughts and responses.

I put lots of effort into painting, I dont want to put minimal effort onto the table. I also am stuck in bed 16 hours on a good day, On my back and in a lot of pain. I can use a ipad to browse and post on Dakka. When i go to play, Its dificult, i am in pain. But my opponant wont know that, and having to argue my case. Against people who are dismissive of my time and ability is probably not worth it, I will just let them have there points if they want it. I dont want to get into a discussion to argue my case. I dont want to talk about my issues to people i only really know at our club.
In the end i will just feel worse about the game, Worse that it is so hard to paint and worse about the painting part of the hobby i enjoy a lot.

This was the opening to your last responce to me on this "All I hear is more excuses. You had the time to go and purchase. You had time to research units and assemble an army. Now all of a sudden you don't have any more time at all? Yet you have time to argue keyboard warriors on the internet? "
I need a mechacal arm to even hold and respond here, I cant just go and paint at any time. I paint when i am able, since its a hobby i enjoy, and i play the game for mental exercise as its one of the few chances i get. I also have to get everything else i want to do in life around the rest i need to have.

Clubs, Tornaments and groups already had ways to deal with this. This rule is just Support for Behavior that is likly more against the ideas that GW themselves say they are against. People wont feel better about the painting hobby, They may feel worse. I probably will :(

A Golden Demon worthy miniature on an unfinished base is still an unfinished miniature.