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.

 Gert wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
Because it has been part of the wargaming tradition since the beginning, and enriches the game and their enjoyment of it. The fact that people aren't good initially (indeed, that's why it's called a learning process) should not really be considered a barrier.

It might enrich your enjoyment but everyone isn't a clone of you, thank god.
Of my gaming group, two of us enjoy conversions. The other three just want to play the game and very rarely even paint their models. Building models with instructions isn't a barrier because the instructions tell you what to do. Converting has no set of instructions and it is down to the individual. Some people just don't have the converting bug and forcing it upon them is a gakky thing to do.

It's a learned skill just like painting, basic construction, playing the game itself and whole other plethora of things. Or do you consider all of those barriers too as you seem to lack the basic opposable thumbs to attach a gun to a model it's not meant to go on?

There sure are a lot of people in this hobby nowadays that don't like integral parts of it... Sounds like they're in the wrong hobby.

We're just not elitists who judge those who don't conform to their exact opinions on warhammer.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
Because it has been part of the wargaming tradition since the beginning, and enriches the game and their enjoyment of it. The fact that people aren't good initially (indeed, that's why it's called a learning process) should not really be considered a barrier.

It might enrich your enjoyment but everyone isn't a clone of you, thank god.
Of my gaming group, two of us enjoy conversions. The other three just want to play the game and very rarely even paint their models. Building models with instructions isn't a barrier because the instructions tell you what to do. Converting has no set of instructions and it is down to the individual. Some people just don't have the converting bug and forcing it upon them is a gakky thing to do.

It's a learned skill just like painting, basic construction, playing the game itself and whole other plethora of things. Or do you consider all of those barriers too as you seem to lack the basic opposable thumbs to attach a gun to a model it's not meant to go on?

There sure are a lot of people in this hobby nowadays that don't like integral parts of it... Sounds like they're in the wrong hobby.

Sounds like you're a heckin' chud gate keeper to me!

 Gert wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
"You WILL convert or you WILL BE SHOT BEHIND THE CHEMICAL SHED!" I scream in my pseudo NKVD uniform, cocking my revolver before removing another mediocre redditor.


Well, if your group isn't even painting models, I can't really say that speaks highly in their favour. Funny that your next point is claiming that it is totally different from converting - and without explaining either!

We're just not elitist pricks who get off on being gakheads to people who don't conform to their exact opinions on warhammer.

You HECKIN ELITIST!

Still haven't explained the difference.

The fix to making people hunt for the best loadout is just to make all options equally viable or allow for easy magnetizing (or just put enough options in the box, but I see that that's not always possible or would raise the prices even more). Unfortunately GW wants to shut alternative companies out so they increasingly produce miniatures that are hard to kitbash and write rules that only allow what's in the box (or don't, like Blightlord terminators that allow for shooting weapons like they are in the box only but allow for optional CC weapons ?.? )

 Grimtuff wrote:
It's a learned skill just like painting, basic construction, playing the game itself and whole other plethora of things.

The difference being there are rules to teach you to play the game and instructions to tell you how to build the models. Painting is only absolutely necessary if you want to go to events, and in my experience, the people who don't want to paint their stuff don't have the time nor the drive to do so.

Or do you consider all of those barriers too as you seem to lack the basic opposable thumbs to attach a gun to a model it's not meant to go on?

Nice. You think of that one all by yourself?

There sure are a lot of people in this hobby nowadays that don't like integral parts of it... Sounds like they're in the wrong hobby.

Depends on how you define hobby

 Gert wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
It's a learned skill just like painting, basic construction, playing the game itself and whole other plethora of things.

The difference being there are rules to teach you to play the game and instructions to tell you how to build the models. Painting is only absolutely necessary if you want to go to events, and in my experience, the people who don't want to paint their stuff don't have the time nor the drive to do so.

Or do you consider all of those barriers too as you seem to lack the basic opposable thumbs to attach a gun to a model it's not meant to go on?

Nice. You think of that one all by yourself?

There sure are a lot of people in this hobby nowadays that don't like integral parts of it... Sounds like they're in the wrong hobby.

Depends on how you define hobby

"Expecting painted models? Sounds a bit ELITIST to me..." has got to be my favourite take.

BTW there are literally legions of tutorials on how to convert - like, the forum has a whole section for them!

Is that what he said? Didn't read it as clearly he pays no attention to my sig...

 Grimtuff wrote:
Is that what he said? Didn't read it as clearly he pays no attention to my sig...

His argument is that you don't need to paint models, it's not important unless you're a tournie or competition player. IMO a wildly dumb position.

 blood reaper wrote:
"Expecting painted models? Sounds a bit ELITIST to me..." has got to be my favourite take.

I would expect painted models at an event I paid to go to, such as an upcoming narrative event in a few weeks. If I happen to be at a local club, I don't have expectations because people don't solely exist to do warhammer. I also don't pass judgment on people before I get a chance to know them. I mean it's not like you could just build the models because you like them and then never play a game in your life, that would be dumb right? Couldn't possibly be the majority of people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:
Is that what he said? Didn't read it as clearly he pays no attention to my sig...

Couldn't be that they don't show up on certain platforms.

 Gert wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
"Expecting painted models? Sounds a bit ELITIST to me..." has got to be my favourite take.

I would expect painted models at an event I paid to go to, such as an upcoming narrative event in a few weeks. If I happen to be at a local club, I don't have expectations because people don't solely exist to do warhammer. I also don't pass judgment on people before I get a chance to know them. I mean it's not like you could just build the models because you like them and then never play a game in your life, that would be dumb right? Couldn't possibly be the majority of people.

I don't think it's a moral failure to not paint models or anything, I think you should however aim to actually paint your figures, and develop those skills. Nor have I said I wouldn't play with people with unpainted figures!

What I have said is that it is expected of people to paint their figures at some point and aim to have painted figures - if you think otherwise, then unironically, find another hobby!

A key part of the game has always been lots of painted figures on the table.

Ironically the exact opposite of that (i.e., the 'poorhammer' experience) ... is usually based all around conversion!

 blood reaper wrote:
I don't think it's a moral failure to not paint models or anything, I think you should however aim to actually paint your figures, and develop those skills. Nor have I said I wouldn't play with people with unpainted figures!

Suprise to me considering how ardent you've been about it.

What I have said is that it is expected of people to paint their figures at some point and aim to have painted figures - if you think otherwise, then unironically, find another hobby!

Show me where it says that all people who do warhammer *must* have painted minis.

A key part of the game has always been lots of painted figures on the table.

And? Who cares what things "always have been", it isn't that now and it shouldn't have to be. People can make their own choices in their hobbies and shouldn't have to suffer people like you judging them for it.

Like...

Converting stuff and being creative with both models and bits has always been a part of this game. Whether it's models or weapons.

I learned very quickly how to make plasma guns from plasma pistols and bolt pistols
20 years ago when I started.

Like anything, you learn and you get better at it.

 blood reaper wrote:

"Expecting painted models? Sounds a bit ELITIST to me..." has got to be my favourite take.

BTW there are literally legions of tutorials on how to convert - like, the forum has a whole section for them!

Well any additional activity to the core one, specially one that is not required to perform it is a of different degrees of just that. I am in my last year of sports school, I know why I need an uniform, school track suit etc. But if went out and told people that in order to play football or basketball, they need a PZS approved clothes, people would think I am drunk or on burners. Models being painted is not needed to play, unlike being able to recognise what the unit or model is and what weapon load outs it carries.

 blood reaper wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
Because it has been part of the wargaming tradition since the beginning, and enriches the game and their enjoyment of it. The fact that people aren't good initially (indeed, that's why it's called a learning process) should not really be considered a barrier.

It might enrich your enjoyment but everyone isn't a clone of you, thank god.
Of my gaming group, two of us enjoy conversions. The other three just want to play the game and very rarely even paint their models. Building models with instructions isn't a barrier because the instructions tell you what to do. Converting has no set of instructions and it is down to the individual. Some people just don't have the converting bug and forcing it upon them is a gakky thing to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 blood reaper wrote:
Yes but people also don't have a talent for painting or basing - yet we're all in the right to complain about unpainted armies and unbased models?

That is entirely different and you know it.

"You WILL convert or you WILL BE SHOT BEHIND THE CHEMICAL SHED!" I scream in my pseudo NKVD uniform, cocking my revolver before removing another mediocre redditor.


Well, if your group isn't even painting models, I can't really say that speaks highly in their favour. Funny that your next point is claiming that it is totally different from converting - and without explaining either!

Speaking of Colin Robinson….I think we’ve found one.

 Gert wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
I don't think it's a moral failure to not paint models or anything, I think you should however aim to actually paint your figures, and develop those skills. Nor have I said I wouldn't play with people with unpainted figures!

Suprise to me considering how ardent you've been about it.

What I have said is that it is expected of people to paint their figures at some point and aim to have painted figures - if you think otherwise, then unironically, find another hobby!

Show me where it says that all people who do warhammer *must* have painted minis.

A key part of the game has always been lots of painted figures on the table.

And? Who cares what things "always have been", it isn't that now and it shouldn't have to be. People can make their own choices in their hobbies and shouldn't have to suffer people like you judging them for it.

I don't think it's been written down anywhere (besides a rule which rewards fully painted armies) but imo it is very amusing that a widely agreed principle of the community "try to paint your figures and have painted armies" is treated as this elitist demagoguery. It is a very telling position to take.

Yes people can make their own choices. How they'll suffer because I think they're making bad choices, I don't know, you'll need to tell me about that (I have not started torturing convertlets and paintlets - not yet at least.)

Gert, if painting is only necessary if you're going to tournaments, why do you feel compelled to convert? Does your casual group not allow proxies?

Deadnight wrote:
Like...

Converting stuff and being creative with both models and bits has always been a part of this game. Whether it's models or weapons.

I learned very quickly how to make plasma guns from plasma pistols and bolt pistols
20 years ago when I started.

Like anything, you learn and you get better at it.

Did you do it because of your love for conversions, or because plasma guns were hard and/or expensive to get, while at the same time being the optimal weapon of choice. How many less optimal or outright bad weapons did you convert, compared to the number of plasmaguns? I have feeling that it may not be many.

Painting should be encouraged, end of.

It's never been easier (contrast paints etc) to paint decently and quickly.

Plus it makes the visual aspect look so much better.

Karol wrote:

Did you do it because of your love for conversions, or because plasma guns were hard and/or expensive to get, while at the same time being the optimal weapon of choice. How many less optimal or outright bad weapons did you convert, compared to the number of plasmaguns? I have feeling that it may not be many.

This might blow your mind but id answer Yes to all of them.

I was new to the hobby, didn't have much in the way of money for my hobby, didn't really know enough about what other kits had what other bits, didnt have much in the way of retail options either(seriously, I was like the obly person in my whole town who knew what warhammer was...) and didn't know enough about the game to know what was optimal or not. So I had to be creative.

I had meltaguns on my old space wolf kits, didn't have much in the ways of flamers or plasmas and wanted the options. Hell I made my first wolf lord from bits in the grey hunter kit.

As to how many models I hqve converted over all the time ive played/collected, quite a few. Especially for wmh, and no, not for 'meta' options either.

And yes, I also like bring creative. Same reason I loved building my own things out of my lego instead of just following the instructions.

Karol wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
Like...

Converting stuff and being creative with both models and bits has always been a part of this game. Whether it's models or weapons.

I learned very quickly how to make plasma guns from plasma pistols and bolt pistols
20 years ago when I started.

Like anything, you learn and you get better at it.

Did you do it because of your love for conversions, or because plasma guns were hard and/or expensive to get, while at the same time being the optimal weapon of choice. How many less optimal or outright bad weapons did you convert, compared to the number of plasmaguns? I have feeling that it may not be many.

You can have one or the other! You cannot do it for both reasons!

 catbarf wrote:
Gert, if painting is only necessary if you're going to tournaments, why do you feel compelled to convert? Does your casual group not allow proxies?

*Events, not just tournaments.
I convert models because I like it and we proxy units all the time. The other day I used a Kataphron Servitor and a Contemptor as proxies for Castellax.
It was only this past year that I really got into painting and mostly because I have events I want to do or if I get a buzz for it. I don't give my friends who don't paint their stuff gak because what would be the point? We all get together and have a fun time regardless. They might paint their stuff eventually but it's not for everyone and we all have more than one hobby to dedicate what is often limited free time to. If it's a complete stranger (like one of my opponents at my first HH event) then I wouldn't ever consider giving them gak, even in jest. I don't know them or their story, and while I would like to play against a fully painted army at a narrative event, I'm not going to kick up a fuss about it.
I used to game with a guy where it seemed like he'd never painted a model in his army. It turned out he was such a perfectionist when it came to painting that if he thought he made one mistake, he'd strip the whole model and start again from scratch.
It's easier to not give people a hard time and just let them be them.

My knowladge of the the english language makes is so I don't understand your what you just said. I clearly said that the things as separate and it is a persons choice what they want to do. One doesn't have to play the game to paint the models, or paint the models to play the game. One can do both, one can do both, One can also do non, it is also an option. As wierd as it is to me. But the idea that in order to play one has to paint the models, makes as much sense as if I told someone who wants to start painting a box of beastman, that they first need to show their ranking in the last store event, else they are not allowed to do it, because playing the game is a crucial part of a table top game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gert wrote:

*Events, not just tournaments.
I convert models because I like it and we proxy units all the time. The other day I used a Kataphron Servitor and a Contemptor as proxies for Castellax.
It was only this past year that I really got into painting and mostly because I have events I want to do or if I get a buzz for it. I don't give my friends who don't paint their stuff gak because what would be the point?

I have a w40k GK army. I also wanted to play Kill Team. To my suprise, even when they are troops and custodes are part of the game, GK can not have a kill team based around termintors, meaning I wouldn't be able to play the game. So I use 3 GK termintors armed with halabards as 3 guardian spear custodes. I have not converted them, I have not repainted them. I just use them to play. I had guy from my school who picked IH at the start of 8th, to have an army which is easy to paint and he liked robots. His army was black and silver +red eyes. There were a ton of people who never finished painting or even started painting their armies in 8th ed. If someone would try to enforce the have to have full army painted with bases etc the only people playing would be guys who are 30+ and playing the game for longer then most of us were, when we started the game.

 Overread wrote:
On the one hand I'd don't like the loss of weapons. I dislike the loss of things like Hive Tyrants with twin-linked devourers or having the option to have one flying around with two pairs of them.

On the other I respect that making the game more about what comes in the box means that it is fair to those who don't have easy access to spare parts, 3rd parties or converting. Heck I recall at the height of the days before the Chapterhouse Lawsuit GW was adding models to armies (esp leaders) which never got a mode. Tyranids only just got one of those the other week. That's YEARS of waiting for a model that appeared so long ago its probably coming up to being old enough to vote.

I can respect this position, mostly.

Post-Chapterhouse, I can understand GW removing units/characters from books that they had no plan on releasing. I might not like it, but I can understand it.

On the other hand, I don't agree with removing options that can be resolved by purchasing two boxes and using their parts together - regardless of whether it is two or three of the same kit (Skitarii) or using one kit to supply parts for another unit (a Devastator box giving different heavy weapons to a Tac squad, or a Sternguard box being used to mod characters or Sergeants in other squads, for example).

The options are there, in many cases have been there for years, and are being removed almost at random, which is doubly odd.

And that's before we get to the potential slowing down of gameplay if you have to resolve multiple different special weapons for a unit such as Plague Marines.

An ideal world would see a box contain all the options available to the unit, but that's going to make certain boxes rather pricy for their points - see, for example, the possibility of a Guard Infantry Squad coming with the HW team parts, as well as assorted options for the Sergeant. Going to be a very expensive 60 points...

Deadnight 805087 11364599 wrote:

I was new to the hobby, didn't have much in the way of money for my hobby, didn't really know enough about what other kits had what other bits, didnt have much in the way of retail options either(seriously, I was like the obly person in my whole town who knew what warhammer was...) and didn't know enough about the game to know what was optimal or not. So I had to be creative.

I had meltaguns on my old space wolf kits, didn't have much in the ways of flamers or plasmas and wanted the options. Hell I made my first wolf lord from bits in the grey hunter kit.

As to how many models I hqve converted over all the time ive played/collected, quite a few. Especially for wmh, and no, not for 'meta' options either.

And yes, I also like bring creative. Same reason I loved building my own things out of my lego instead of just following the instructions.

This doesn't sound to me like being reallycreative, but just wanting to have plasma guns which were the good weapon options. I doubt you converted many heavy bolters for your Long Fangs, or what ever else was considered a bad weapon in the past. But this doesn't have to be a you thing anyway. One just has to look at 3ed company pages to look what weapons are being bought out and which are never OOP.

Painting should be encouraged, end of.

It's never been easier (contrast paints etc) to paint decently and quickly.

It costs money and takes up time. No one who has to save up models wants to be both told that his army is now pushed 6 months, or more, in to being complet, because they need to paint it first. It only doesn't matter to people who already have painted armies, or ones like me who got their army already painted. This is even more a thing, if the person doesn't like to paint. I never heard of any rules saying that in order to paint another box of w40k models, someone has to show up at the store and play 25-30 hours.

I like the method of only using whats in the box for unit options. I never liked having to buy multiple boxes, or get 2nd hand parts to max out the 'good' options in a squad. I remember kharadron overlords having units where this was especially egregious, where if you could afford to buy more boxes you could have a better load out.

For quality of life for the customer, I an very happy knowing whats in the box is all I need to worry about, and not having to worry about hunting down 2nd hand parts, kit bashing, or buying a bunch of boxes for a weapon or two.

Does it look odd on the datasheets sometimes? Yep, totally does.

It is not a question of odd. A unit of overlords with 4 of the same "heavy" weapon doesn't just work better, then one armed with one of each. It works at all. If a squad of termintors can't be run as 3 cheap dudes with combi meltas or 5 with combi plasma, but instead you can have one of the combi weapons each, then the unit just losts utility. Worse the way GW cuts some boxs, like for ork boys or csm, you still have to buy two boxs if you want to have 10 shoting or 10 melee models.

Not being able to build 5 Chaos Terminators with Chain axes + combi-bolter actually dissuaded me from buying the kit altogether a couple of years ago.

The "only what's in the kit" bullgak is just another symptom of the disease:
GW is not interested in making a wargame.
They are interested in making a war-themed boardgame.

 jaredb wrote:
I like the method of only using whats in the box for unit options. I never liked having to buy multiple boxes, or get 2nd hand parts to max out the 'good' options in a squad. I remember kharadron overlords having units where this was especially egregious, where if you could afford to buy more boxes you could have a better load out.

For quality of life for the customer, I an very happy knowing whats in the box is all I need to worry about, and not having to worry about hunting down 2nd hand parts, kit bashing, or buying a bunch of boxes for a weapon or two.

Does it look odd on the datasheets sometimes? Yep, totally does.

I can sympathize with that viewpoint, but IIRC GW used to allow you to order individual sprues. It's not an ideal solution, but it was a decent middle ground between having to buy multiple kits to outfit a single unit, the SKU hell that would be selling individual bits, and having one UND ONLY EIN way to kit out a squad.

 Gert wrote:
"Does anyone like getting punched in the face?"

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The "only what's in the kit" bullgak is just another symptom of the disease:
GW is not interested in making a wargame.
They are interested in making a war-themed boardgame.

Boardgames are popular + MTG is popular = $€£¥ GW wants that level so....we end up with much less WARGAME & are left with just a (small)war(titanic)GAME.

Racerguy180 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The "only what's in the kit" bullgak is just another symptom of the disease:
GW is not interested in making a wargame.
They are interested in making a war-themed boardgame.

Boardgames are popular + MTG is popular = $€£¥ GW wants that level so....we end up with much less WARGAME & are left with just a (small)war(titanic)GAME.

Yes, I know very well. I think I made a thread about it myself back in the day.

I just wanted to be clear that this ONE WAY ONLY to build units is exactly consistent with the overall gamey trend, moving away from a wargame abstracting the setting and the armies within it and instead moving towards a boardgame with some associated novels.