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

I like to have fully painted models on the table. I prefer skirmish games, and I'm sure part of it is because I don't have the willpower to paint a full unit of 30 Clanrats in an afternoon or two. It would take me weeks to paint them, even with a simple scheme, because I lose attention pretty fast. But, for skirmish games, namely Infinity, painting 15 models, in which a lot of models different, is a lot easier for me. I'll eventually have a Skaven army painted, probably a few years into The Old World. But, until then, my Combined Army are my only fully painted force.

For my opponents, I've played with people who had their models held together by poster putty, and for the wrong game. I've lent fully painted Skitarii for an Infinity game once, and hoped he remembered what was what. I'm not particularly worried about paint jobs, or even correct models, as long as I get a fun game out of it. I just like my own models to be painted.

 Polonius wrote:
Yeah, allegations of gatekeeping are a bigger deal in fandoms, where basically it doesn't matter if you've seen one star wars movie or read every scrap of lore, anybody can be a star wars fan. If you like it, you like.

Actually doing a hobby though, there are simply levels. I'm not a great painter or highly skilled player or dedicated loremaster, and that's okay. I respect the people that have the skills or dedication that I don't. Likewise, at least my stuff is painted, and I feel a little bit better than those without it. the human compulsion to seek our categories and hierarchies isn't our most noble trait, but it's hard to shake.

If said I was a snowboarding fan, and people gave me crap about now knowing enough about snowboarding to say I like it, that's gatekeeping. OTOH, since I"m a fat, out of shape middle aged man who lives in the deep south who has never actually, you know, snowboarded, it's not exactly gatekeeping to be skeptical of claims that I'm just as much a snowboarder as Olympic athletes

Couple issues here. First, your analogy is kind of disingenuous. Someone who enjoys one or more aspects of the hobby but not painting is still participating in the hobby. They're just not engaging in one of the aspects that you personally enjoy. Someone who likes playing the game and building models isn't analogous to a snowboarder who has never snowboarded; they're more analogous to a snowboarder that doesn't enjoy certain slopes or doing certain kinds of tricks or putting decals on his gear. So in this analogy, you're a fellow snowboarder accusing someone of being lazy because they didn't spend time and money to put custom decals on their board.

And that brings us to the second issue: your behavior towards your fellow 40k fans. It's fine if you don't enjoy playing games against unpainted armies. If that's genuinely a critical part of the hobby for you that prevents you from enjoying what would otherwise be a pleasant gaming experience, fine. But the way you've written your posts in this thread, it comes across as you going a step further and being insulting to those who don't share your personal preferences. You've called your fellow 40k fans lazy and compared playing with unpainted minis to being unhygienic.

"You enjoy camping, but you don't like fishing while you camp? Wow. You must be lazy. If I see you not fishing while we camp in the same general area, it's basically like you're forcing me to sniff your unwashed armpit."
^See how that sounds?

 Polonius wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Polonius wrote:


"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.

You're confusing [/i]your hobby with mine.
MY hobby is playing games.
I'm very good at my hobby regardless of the amount of paint on any given model.

I mean, there's sort of limit to how good you can be at playing 40k now that most events have paint requirements, but that's fine.

There isn't. That extra 10pts you get for paint has nothing to do with your skill at [i]playing the game.

Just have to pull this little nugget out:

 Polonius wrote:
... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...

Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!

Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Just have to pull this little nugget out:

 Polonius wrote:
... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...

Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!

Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?

If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.

ccs wrote:

Spoiler:

 Polonius wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Polonius wrote:


"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.

You're confusing [/i]your hobby with mine.
MY hobby is playing games.
I'm very good at my hobby regardless of the amount of paint on any given model.

I mean, there's sort of limit to how good you can be at playing 40k now that most events have paint requirements, but that's fine.

There isn't. That extra 10pts you get for paint has nothing to do with your skill at [i]playing the game.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Just have to pull this little nugget out:

 Polonius wrote:
... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...

Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!

Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?

If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.

I prefer “Heresy” by Kalvin Klein myself. Gives that feeling of chaos but with a hint of class.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:

Wyldhunt wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Just have to pull this little nugget out:

 Polonius wrote:
... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...

Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!

Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?

If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.

I prefer “Heresy” by Kalvin Klein myself. Gives that feeling of chaos but with a hint of class.

That's the one that starts by smelling a lot like Imperial Spice but then changes to a more sour smell after a while, right?

Wyldhunt wrote:Couple issues here. First, your analogy is kind of disingenuous. Someone who enjoys one or more aspects of the hobby but not painting is still participating in the hobby. They're just not engaging in one of the aspects that you personally enjoy. Someone who likes playing the game and building models isn't analogous to a snowboarder who has never snowboarded; they're more analogous to a snowboarder that doesn't enjoy certain slopes or doing certain kinds of tricks or putting decals on his gear. So in this analogy, you're a fellow snowboarder accusing someone of being lazy because they didn't spend time and money to put custom decals on their board.

I still think that it's not really gatekeeping to accurately notice what a person is doing. A person that does harder slopes might not want to spend the day with a person who only does the bunny hill. I don't think it's judgmental for the former to say "yeah, i'm only interested in doing the harder courses."

And that brings us to the second issue: your behavior towards your fellow 40k fans. It's fine if you don't enjoy playing games against unpainted armies. If that's genuinely a critical part of the hobby for you that prevents you from enjoying what would otherwise be a pleasant gaming experience, fine. But the way you've written your posts in this thread, it comes across as you going a step further and being insulting to those who don't share your personal preferences. You've called your fellow 40k fans lazy and compared playing with unpainted minis to being unhygienic.

Well, to be fair, a lot of 40k fans are lazy. I sure am!

And the hygiene thing was about how different standards apply in different situations. I explicitly said that I often wear a t-shirt and shorts and don't shower, so if I'm painting anybody with a broad brush, that includes me. What I said was that while being super casual is fine some places, it's rude in others. If a restaurant wants collared shirts, and you show up in a tank top, the restaurant isn't being judgey. Likewise, if the expectation for a game or event is painted, and you don't paint, that's just tough.

"You enjoy camping, but you don't like fishing while you camp? Wow. You must be lazy. If I see you not fishing while we camp in the same general area, it's basically like you're forcing me to sniff your unwashed armpit."
^See how that sounds?

Like an almost intentional misreading of my posts?

ccs wrote:There isn't. That extra 10pts you get for paint has nothing to do with your skill at playing the game.

i was saying that if you don't pain, you can't show off that skill at the best events, because they require painting.

You are confusing it. YOUR hobby includes the painting aspect. And although painting is something that I do, MINE really does not. Like I said, MY hobby is playing games. 40k is but one of many games....
Our hobbies only intersect at the point of playing. So if you're judging beyond that it's a you thing.
And if bother to scroll back a page or so? You'll see my reply where I state that while the goal is a fully painted stuff, I paint slowly & sporadically and am not worried about how long it may take me to reach that goal. [/quote[

and you read all of my posts, you'll see that I support people that are making progress. I've repeatedly said that I'm most annoyed by people who both make zero progress, and make excuses for not making any progress.

How cute, you're quoting the aspirational plague on your wall.

Hey, sometimes it turns out the best thing to do is to Live, Laugh, and Love. And then paint your army.

Wyldhunt wrote:

That's the one that starts by smelling a lot like Imperial Spice but then changes to a more sour smell after a while, right?

No, no. It smells like opportunity, then over time, certain weapons simply fall off the models.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Just have to pull this little nugget out:

 Polonius wrote:
... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...

Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!

Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?

That fake-ass assessment falls apart sooo fast, too.

Player A: hates painting and has stopped, but has GD-level paintjobs in their past
Player B: hates painting but dutifully does it to average tabletop standard for all armies
Player C: loves painting and paints all armies, but is not a good painter

Who's the most complete hobbyist here?

Wyldhunt wrote:
If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.

I mean, I'd probably buy model scents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Just have to pull this little nugget out:

 Polonius wrote:
... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...

Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!

Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?

This, uh, isn't a trick question. You can call it well rounded or whatever, but probably the person who engages in the most aspects of the hobby.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Altruizine wrote:
That fake-ass assessment falls apart sooo fast, too.

Player A: hates painting and has stopped, but has GD-level paintjobs in their past
Player B: hates painting but dutifully does it to average tabletop standard for all armies
Player C: loves painting and paints all armies, but is not a good painter

Who's the most complete hobbyist here?

There's this bizarre preoccupation with insisting that my snobbery that people try is actually snobbery that people excel.

If you paint, you paint. Now, if we talk about techniques and such, rather than levels of quality, sure. I'm a less complete hobbyist than somebody who airbrushes, because there are simply techniques I can't apply. Likewise 3d printing, which is something I have negative interest in.

But to my mind, a person who uses a wide variety of techniques and materials, even somewhat clumsily, is a more complete hobbyist than somebody who as learned a few tricks with an airbrush but can't do much beyond a simple fade or OSL.

I only play fully painted these days. I have no expectation that my opponent does the same. Well painted opponents certainly improves the experience for me, but I'll play against whatever you've got.

CadianSgtBob wrote:
Fully painted, no exceptions. If it is not painted to at least basic tabletop standard it does not get used in a game. And if your army is not fully painted to that standard I will not play a game against you.

Dang, I just tuned in to this, but this post is just so on brand for you it's almost comical.

Regarding the original question: I try to set a high standard for my paintjobs and try to paint everything I bring to the table, but I could't care less if my opponent has painted models or not. If they are, awsome! If they are not, it's not a problem as long as both parties are having a good time playing the game.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Just have to pull this little nugget out:

 Polonius wrote:
... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...

Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!

Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?

If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.

I mean you guys are literally leaving out all of the context of the point he was making. Even in this clearly over-the-top example, I'm pretty sure he would say "cool that you go over the top to make your models smell a certain way and it's 100% your choice if you wanna not play me because I don't do it"

Why do people get so mad if someone doesn't want to play against a sea of grey miniatures? why should I get mad if someone doesn't want to play against my non "perfumed" army? Why would someone with a grey army want to play against someone who really wants 2 painted armies on the table?

 Polonius wrote:

There's this bizarre preoccupation with insisting that my snobbery that people try is actually snobbery that people excel.

If you paint, you paint. Now, if we talk about techniques and such, rather than levels of quality, sure. I'm a less complete hobbyist than somebody who airbrushes, because there are simply techniques I can't apply. Likewise 3d printing, which is something I have negative interest in.

I would submit that that is actually people giving you the benefit of the doubt, because "I want my games to look good" is kind of a sympathetic position, but "I want people to suffer through doing something they don't enjoy to produce a token end result that may or may not look good" is sheer sadistic idiocy.

 Polonius wrote:

Wyldhunt wrote:Couple issues here. First, your analogy is kind of disingenuous. Someone who enjoys one or more aspects of the hobby but not painting is still participating in the hobby. They're just not engaging in one of the aspects that you personally enjoy. Someone who likes playing the game and building models isn't analogous to a snowboarder who has never snowboarded; they're more analogous to a snowboarder that doesn't enjoy certain slopes or doing certain kinds of tricks or putting decals on his gear. So in this analogy, you're a fellow snowboarder accusing someone of being lazy because they didn't spend time and money to put custom decals on their board.

I still think that it's not really gatekeeping to accurately notice what a person is doing. A person that does harder slopes might not want to spend the day with a person who only does the bunny hill. I don't think it's judgmental for the former to say "yeah, i'm only interested in doing the harder courses."

Passively noticing someone is on the bunny hill is harmless. Going up to them to tell them that you don't like the bunny hill because it's not cool enough for you comes across as rude. Similarly, it's fine if you don't approach people with gray armies for pickup games at your FLGS; just don't go out of your way to tell those people you plan to avoid them.

And that brings us to the second issue: your behavior towards your fellow 40k fans. It's fine if you don't enjoy playing games against unpainted armies. If that's genuinely a critical part of the hobby for you that prevents you from enjoying what would otherwise be a pleasant gaming experience, fine. But the way you've written your posts in this thread, it comes across as you going a step further and being insulting to those who don't share your personal preferences. You've called your fellow 40k fans lazy and compared playing with unpainted minis to being unhygienic.

Well, to be fair, a lot of 40k fans are lazy. I sure am!

And the hygiene thing was about how different standards apply in different situations. I explicitly said that I often wear a t-shirt and shorts and don't shower, so if I'm painting anybody with a broad brush, that includes me. What I said was that while being super casual is fine some places, it's rude in others. If a restaurant wants collared shirts, and you show up in a tank top, the restaurant isn't being judgey. Likewise, if the expectation for a game or event is painted, and you don't paint, that's just tough.

Restaurants with dress codes generally post those dress codes somewhere, and 40k events that expect paint jobs say as much. Unless your FLGS has a sign up saying they don't like gray plastic, then people shouldn't be expected to show up with a paint job. Did I miss the post where we established that you were referring to events with an explicit paint expectation?

"You enjoy camping, but you don't like fishing while you camp? Wow. You must be lazy. If I see you not fishing while we camp in the same general area, it's basically like you're forcing me to sniff your unwashed armpit."
^See how that sounds?

Like an almost intentional misreading of my posts?

Sincerely, I don't see how so. Maybe I missed your post where more context was established, but everything from you that I've read in this thread comes across as rudely taking jabs at people for not meeting your personal standards. Which is where the rudeness comes in. It's fine if you prefer games with painted armies, but it's less fine to imply people who don't mind gray plastic are lazy or enjoying the hobby incorrectly.

 Altruizine wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

There's this bizarre preoccupation with insisting that my snobbery that people try is actually snobbery that people excel.

If you paint, you paint. Now, if we talk about techniques and such, rather than levels of quality, sure. I'm a less complete hobbyist than somebody who airbrushes, because there are simply techniques I can't apply. Likewise 3d printing, which is something I have negative interest in.

I would submit that that is actually people giving you the benefit of the doubt, because "I want my games to look good" is kind of a sympathetic position, but "I want people to suffer through doing something they don't enjoy to produce a token end result that may or may not look good" is sheer sadistic idiocy.

Because even a "token end result that may or may not look good" still looks better than bare plastic.

As I've said repeatedly, even just freaking spraying your models with a colored primer helps!

What I'm saying is that I do want my games to look good. I don't care if a person paints, buys painted models, has his models painted, whatever. It's not realistic to expect a certain level of quality, so when a person is at least trying, I cut them a lot more slack. I wouldn't exclude a poorly but fully painted army from a narrative event or apocalypse game, because to me that seems harsh.

Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.

Asmodios wrote:

I mean you guys are literally leaving out all of the context of the point he was making. Even in this clearly over-the-top example, I'm pretty sure he would say "cool that you go over the top to make your models smell a certain way and it's 100% your choice if you wanna not play me because I don't do it"

The point I was trying to illustrate is that it's not okay for me to start taking shots at people (accusing them of theft for instance) just because they don't engage in an aspect of the hobby I enjoy. With scented oils being used as an example of a behavior that doesn't impact most folks' lore/model building/gaming experience. Most people don't much care how an army smells, so my hope was that this would serve as a useful tool for explaining the position of those who don't care about paintjobs. Like scent, a lack of paint jobs doesn't detract from the gaming or model building parts of the hobby. It would be weird of me to call you lazy for not not spritzing your army with interesting smells just because I enjoy the hobby more when the armies are smelly.

 Polonius wrote:


Because even a "token end result that may or may not look good" still looks better than bare plastic.

yeah, no.

i'd rather play agaisnt grey plastic than an army of these dudes

Wyldhunt wrote:
Maybe I missed your post where more context was established, but everything from you that I've read in this thread comes across as rudely taking jabs at people for not meeting your personal standards. Which is where the rudeness comes in. It's fine if you prefer games with painted armies, but it's less fine to imply people who don't mind gray plastic are lazy or enjoying the hobby incorrectly.

Okay... but aren't they at least a little bit lazy? I suppose you can argue that some people genuinely prefer bare plastic to painted, but I have a feeling most people think painted armies look better, but don't want to put in the work. I guess I don't see how that isn't laziness.

I'm sorry if me thinking a person who won't paint is a bit lazy. I understand this makes me the worst person alive.

 Polonius wrote:

Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.

an unpleasant task that takes a lot of your hobby time... And for people that don't paint much, it takes them even longer (yes, even when painting with contrast)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Polonius wrote:


Okay... but aren't they at least a little bit lazy?

no, its not being lazy, its called "not enjoying that aspect of the hobby".

Reminder : a hobby is something you do because you enjoy it.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Polonius wrote:


Because even a "token end result that may or may not look good" still looks better than bare plastic.

yeah, no.

i'd rather play agaisnt grey plastic than an army of these dudes

Here's the thing... macro lenses are a harsh mistress. That's an ugly model, but you put ten together in a squad and put them four feet away, and they'll look... maybe not fine, but at least not nearly as embarrassing as you think.

Gaming miniatures aren't just works of art. They are also gaming pieces which are intended to convey information. Say what you want about that model, but you can see it's a Dark Angel, you can tell it's the sergeant, and you can see it's weapons and gear. Even if a model doesn't look very good aesthetically, it can stil do a much stronger job of communicating weapons and other signifiers than bare plastic.

outside of almost deliberatly trying to ruin a model, actually playing the game against even crudely and poorly painted models is superior. It's just really hard to argue.

What if they’re running Ultramarines, not Dark Angels?

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.

an unpleasant task that takes a lot of your hobby time... And for people that don't paint much, it takes them even longer (yes, even when painting with contrast)

Oh, it's unpleasant and it takes time! I see we're back to the mythical gamer who literally has exactly enough hobby time to play 40k, but zero hobby time to paint. What a strange schedule that person must have!

 Polonius wrote:


Okay... but aren't they at least a little bit lazy?

no, its not being lazy, its called "not enjoying that aspect of the hobby".

Reminder : a hobby is something you do because you enjoy it.

If I don't enjoy replacing divots on the fairway, it's fine for me to leave them, right? And if I don't enjoy wearing headphones on the bus, it's fine to listen to my music at a high volume, right?

40k is a social game. Painting your models improves the experience for your opponent, both aesthetically and by making it easier to differentiate units and weapons. Choosing not to do so is making the game slightly harder for your opponent and limiting their enjoyment. But, I guess it's okay because you really don't want to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
What if they’re running Ultramarines, not Dark Angels?

Then they're dark angels models using Ultramarines rules.

Okay, but then the paint job doesn’t actually help identify anything. If anything, it can cause confusion.

I don’t think it’s an actual issue (it’s really easy to remember what subfaction your opponent is playing) but it doesn’t help anything either.

 Polonius wrote:


Oh, it's unpleasant and it takes time! I see we're back to the mythical gamer who literally has exactly enough hobby time to play 40k, but zero hobby time to paint. What a strange schedule that person must have!

Its not a mythical gamer lol. Whether someone has 2 hours of 50 hours per week of hobby time doesnt change the fact that they shouldn't feel pressured to spend it doing something they don't enjoy.

 Polonius wrote:

Wyldhunt wrote:
Maybe I missed your post where more context was established, but everything from you that I've read in this thread comes across as rudely taking jabs at people for not meeting your personal standards. Which is where the rudeness comes in. It's fine if you prefer games with painted armies, but it's less fine to imply people who don't mind gray plastic are lazy or enjoying the hobby incorrectly.

Okay... but aren't they at least a little bit lazy? I suppose you can argue that some people genuinely prefer bare plastic to painted, but I have a feeling most people think painted armies look better, but don't want to put in the work. I guess I don't see how that isn't laziness.

I'm sorry if me thinking a person who won't paint is a bit lazy. I understand this makes me the worst person alive.

I absolutely think a solid grey plastic model (that is well assembled, eg. without glue overflow, without mold lines, barrels drilled) looks better than a poorly painted model. But I also think that a solid colour/single spray coat model looks better than a mixed medium unpainted model (ie. metal with plastic parts glued on, or plastic with a lot of gap-filling). The point is that "what looks good" is a highly-personal sentiment, so your desire that other people perform <X> minimum amount of painting coverage/techniques to their models could very well require them to make their models look worse to them.

Nobody has called you the worst person alive. The thread has largely focused on 1) telling paint supremacists to keep their opinions to themselves (in the context of actual play spaces and gaming communities) and 2) challenging their priorities, when they prize the colour of a piece of a plastic above the potential for a fun opponent/fun game.

I'm actually mostly fine with your ultimate position, because on a previous page you said you would still play against unpainted figs. I have no problem with someone who, faced with two possible opponent armies, one painted, one unpainted, would rather play the painted. You're capable of showing some capacity for compromise and fellowship while still pursuing your preferences. My deepest derision is reserved for someone who would refuse to play against unpainted models -- ie. they walk into a store looking for a game, there's one opponent with an unpainted army, and they turn around and leave instead of playing. Because their priorities are truly f-ed up at that point. They're the lost and damned.

Eh-I don’t share the priorities, but if you only enjoy painted games, then you shouldn’t be forced to play an unpainted army.

Their enjoyment is as valid as anyone else’s.

 Polonius wrote:

If I don't enjoy replacing divots on the fairway, it's fine for me to leave them, right?

no because i assume most golfing clubs have a rule where you have to replace them? (i know nothing of golf tbh)

 Polonius wrote:


And if I don't enjoy wearing headphones on the bus, it's fine to listen to my music at a high volume, right?

no, because then you're forcing your hobby (listening to music) onto other people. Much like you are by wanting everyone to paint their minis. Oh, and theres a thing known as social contract which means you shouldnt listen to music without headphones in public