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.

Derail from this thread, about painting and 30k.

My stance is that you should engage in the hobby in the manners you enjoy-modeling, playing, painting, whatever brings you joy. And you don't have to engage in parts that don't bring you joy.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Derail from this thread, about painting and 30k.

My stance is that you should engage in the hobby in the manners you enjoy-modeling, playing, painting, whatever brings you joy. And you don't have to engage in parts that don't bring you joy.

I agree but I would also say that if you are going to engage with a group then you have to engage with those elements that the group supports and upholds as well for the group enjoyment.

So whilst you might not enjoy painting as much as other elements of the hobby; a group might decide that they want painted models on the table. So if you want to engage with that particular group then you have to paint up; or join another or found your own.




There's another element to this as well. Personally I find a LOT of people who "don't enjoy" something within a hobby they engage with often have reasons for that. Many times it can be things like lacking skill; a perceived lack of skill; lack of confidence; lack of proper teaching and guidance etc...Ergo part of the reason they dislike it is that they are simply not good at it and unsure how to learn it on their own. Many times these people simply need the proper teaching and guiding experience to at least unlock the skill high enough to make it a tolerable part of the hobby.


I think people get annoyed when they are "forced" to paint because then it stops being a confidence or skill thing and becomes more of an ego thing and I see this online a lot with paint chat. Where it fast moves away from reasons why a person doesn't enjoy painting and into one of "you can't tell me what to do" attitudes (on both sides) which fast boils things into a fight of egos and emotions.



Again my view is that people are free to engage with the hobby how they choose, however when those people then engage with a group there's an added layer of what the group enjoys being layered on top. Yes you can put your case for a group to change its standards/policies; you can push for a group to adapt and adopt a different policy; or you can found your own group along different agendas.


*ok you can and some people get great joy from collecting boxes; but then you're not really miniature modelling nor wargaming or such, you're collecting boxes and that's a separate, if linked, hobby

 JNAProductions wrote:
Derail from this thread, about painting and 30k.

My stance is that you should engage in the hobby in the manners you enjoy-modeling, playing, painting, whatever brings you joy. And you don't have to engage in parts that don't bring you joy.

Fully agreed on all points.

Yeah-if you don’t enjoy playing against unpainted minis, you shouldn’t have to.
A gaming club or event is free to set their standards, whatever they might be.
So if you’re the only one in a group who doesn’t paint and the others are genuinely not enjoying that, you should either learn to paint more or find another group. (Though, obviously, the other members shouldn’t be rude to you just for not painting-be polite.)

But universal standards… they’re not and shouldn’t be a thing for a hobby like this.

 JNAProductions wrote:
But universal standards… they’re not and shouldn’t be a thing for a hobby like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

The vast majority of people prefer to have painted models on the table if given a choice between playing against a nicely painted army or bare plastic. Mandatory painting is good for the community as a whole as it makes it an explicit standard that you are expected to do your part to contribute to a positive gaming experience. And with GW creating contrast paints and making it trivially easy to reach a basic tabletop standard there's really no excuse for refusing to paint.

I don’t think “My specific way of playing a niche game isn’t met” is the same as that.

I myself genuinely don’t really care if armies are painted. It’s neat if they’re done well, but it’s not a bad experience if they’re grey.

I mean its a bit of a non-thing because it entirely depends on the group you are playing with.
My friend plays Tsons but only really got into painting recently as something they enjoy. Now we all made jokes about their stuff not being painted but I also offered to paint some of their units to help them along. The catalyst was attending a narrative weekend where penalties are given for unpainted units/armies. Such units/armies would not receive their Legion rules or equivalent so we pooled our resources and both painted his remaining units.
For our immediate game group their unpainted stuff wasn't a big deal but when we went outside of that it was a requirement.
As long as people are complying with rules set within a given community there is no issue.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I don’t think “My specific way of playing a niche game isn’t met” is the same as that.

I myself genuinely don’t really care if armies are painted. It’s neat if they’re done well, but it’s not a bad experience if they’re grey.

Polls show you're in the minority and most people prefer to see painted armies even when they refuse to paint their own armies.

Polls are not valid because they reflect only people that have taken part.
Those are not representative by design, because only people who read them and who are interested will vote. Even if all forum users would take part it would reflect the opinion of the vast majority of all Warhammer players only by chance.
Also prefer does not mean I care or that I will not play if the condition is not met.
I for one prefer to play against well painted armies, but I do not mind if my opponents army is not painted.

As someone with an eye injury, requiring "all models must be painted" feels a bit tough. I've spent hundreds of euros in models, and yet another in custom bits and whatnot, and I have no desire to mess up those expensive models with a subpar paintjob just in order to be able to play some games. If it takes me years to paint up my lovingly curated army, you can't pressure me to "jus get it done", it'll take as long as it takes.

Besides, I don't even agree with the oversimplification that "game looks much better with painted models". The way some people paint, I feel the models would have looked better in bare plastic

Aecus Decimus wrote:
Mandatory painting is good for the community as a whole as it makes it an explicit standard that you are expected to do your part to contribute to a positive gaming experience.

Telling people they can't play if they don't paint their minis isn't conducive of a very positive experience for anyone but you.

Alternatively, you paint their minis for them. For free.

 tauist wrote:
Besides, I don't even agree with the oversimplification that "game looks much better with painted models". The way some people paint, I feel the models would have looked better in bare plastic

I agree, it's something I call LEGO eyes, like when you stop seeing the angles and studs of the bricks and fully envision the thing they represent, so an unpainted army can be seen with all the potential beauty it could someday hold - but an army painted like ass is just that, it's locked into being ugly forever.

No painting requirements. The worst thing about 9th is the paint scoring, people who are bad at the game are just jealous of people with better armies and want participation trophy points for painting instead of learning how to get better at the game. And not everyone can afford to buy commission painting.

Eh. Bit of both.

Even as a seriously reluctant painter, I do prefer to play against painted armies.

But, I’m not a particular stickler, especially as there’s a distinct difference between an unpainted army, and one which is a work in progress - however slow that progress might appear.

I certainly against snobbery about the perceived competence of painting. Sure it’s literally not a pretty sight when someone hasn’t bothered, but again there’s a difference between hasn’t really bothered, and genuinely not a natural painter.

This is a hobby. We are a community. Communities are suppose to support and encourage each other.

I hate playing with unpainted minis, I don't mind playing against them. None of my friends particularly care, so even if a rule were added for painting minis, it wouldn't affect us.

After my Salamanders were stolen, it's been really hard to actually sit down and fully paint the replacements. I got thru primer + base colours (on the AOD box + tanks)but then just didn't "feel" it.

Thought if I continued on my in-progress EC I'd get my groove back. It only kinda worked.

I have a narrative event coming up that's not requiring full paint but my goal is to have everything minimum 3 step for each colour. The tanks are gonna be the true test to see if I "feel" it again.

So normally I'd only field fully painted myself, but circumstances beyond my control changed my position. But I don't care if the other army is fully painted. My enjoyment of the game is not contingent upon others painting/not painting their own personal property.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Telling people they can't play if they don't paint their minis isn't conducive of a very positive experience for anyone but you.

For me, and for everyone else who values the aesthetic part of the game. I don't particularly care if people who don't contribute to an enjoyable game don't have a positive experience as a result of setting quality standards.

Alternatively, you paint their minis for them. For free.

Or they could do the minimum expected and paint their models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
[I agree, it's something I call LEGO eyes, like when you stop seeing the angles and studs of the bricks and fully envision the thing they represent, so an unpainted army can be seen with all the potential beauty it could someday hold - but an army painted like ass is just that, it's locked into being ugly forever.

Could, but never will. And I don't see potential, I see ugly gray plastic and unfinished models because that's what's actually on the table. Even a basic prime + contrast standard looks far better than that.

 Conscript #760714 wrote:
No painting requirements. The worst thing about 9th is the paint scoring, people who are bad at the game are just jealous of people with better armies and want participation trophy points for painting instead of learning how to get better at the game. And not everyone can afford to buy commission painting.

So much of what is wrong with the hobby, summed up in one efficient little post. Do you happen to live in Poland by any chance?

You can value the looks of a game while still enjoying it just fine with unpainted minis.

Again-I have no issue with you having your standards and sticking to them. But pretending that your standards are the objectively correct ones, I take umbrage with.

Possibly slightly judgey bunghole post?

I think I’d be very wary of someone fielding an entirely unpainted army in a tournament environment - particular if said army is perhaps the new hotness.

I mean, amongst my collection are the muscle and bones of a Fury of the Ancients list. I’ve done this because I bloody love Dreadnoughts as a thing, and Contemptors in particular because of my fond memories and reverence of 2nd Ed Epic. But I get it’s somewhat OP - so im going to get them painted, and to the best of my limited ability. Hopefully at least then Opponents will appreciate I was attracted to that list for Reasons Of Cool.

On my 5th beer. Apologies if this doesn’t quite make sense,

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Possibly slightly judgey bunghole post?

I think I’d be very wary of someone fielding an entirely unpainted army in a tournament environment - particular if said army is perhaps the new hotness.

I mean, amongst my collection are the muscle and bones of a Fury of the Ancients list. I’ve done this because I bloody love Dreadnoughts as a thing, and Contemptors in particular because of my fond memories and reverence of 2nd Ed Epic. But I get it’s somewhat OP - so im going to get them painted, and to the best of my limited ability. Hopefully at least then Opponents will appreciate I was attracted to that list for Reasons Of Cool.

On my 5th beer. Apologies if this doesn’t quite make sense,

Perfectly fine

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Possibly slightly judgey bunghole post?

I think I’d be very wary of someone fielding an entirely unpainted army in a tournament environment - particular if said army is perhaps the new hotness.

I mean, amongst my collection are the muscle and bones of a Fury of the Ancients list. I’ve done this because I bloody love Dreadnoughts as a thing, and Contemptors in particular because of my fond memories and reverence of 2nd Ed Epic. But I get it’s somewhat OP - so im going to get them painted, and to the best of my limited ability. Hopefully at least then Opponents will appreciate I was attracted to that list for Reasons Of Cool.

On my 5th beer. Apologies if this doesn’t quite make sense,

Heh, yeah, I'd feel better about having to deal with a FotA list if they were all well painted. At least that way they'd look better in my opponent's dead pile.

Also: Beer for beer, MDG?

I think one of the troubling things is that 30k is often seen as the gatekeep-y-est of the warhammer games, and for good reason.

30k is as close to a 'historical' game as GW have produced, and it's fictional history. Still, that sort of thing attracts a certain kind of player, people that care about the lore and consistency. There's still plenty of freedom, like playing traitor ultramarines or loyalist word bearers, but generally people still expect your Salamanders to be green and your Imperial Fists to be yellow.

People joke about breaking 'immersion' but that absolutely is a thing that 30k players try to hold onto. That's why they (I) get uppity when someone tries to come to the table with primaris models, or they try to bring competitive-ness into the game, when the old guard of 30k want to stick to what makes it the fiction-historical game that it is.

We know it's unbalanced, we know creative options are limited, but we still try to encourage (or bully) people into following a certain guideline in order to be seen as 'in'.

The result is, yes, you're going to have people ostracized. You're going to have people that are not going to have a good time in that type of community, and you're going to have a fishbowl of like-minded individuals that might have a hard time expanding their group or encouraging new players to take part in their hobby.

The flip side is that this is ALL based on opinion, and someone that wants your Salamanders to be green instead of pink is... well, that's their opinion. Nothing in the world is stopping you from painting your Salamanders pink, but someone that doesn't want to play against you is right in not playing with your army on the table.

It's a give-and-take, but that's true for 40k and AoS too, even to the extremes. You can paint all of your space marines as My Little Pony characters, or paint big-chested anime girls on your Tau riptides and hammerheads, but your opponent isn't obligated to play a game against you.

So let's take a step back and look at the situation from another angle.

You're a hobbyist that comes into 30k thinking 'boy space marines sure are cool!' and your local group tells you 'here's the starter set, here's the books, which legion are you interested in?' and you say "I want to paint my marines purple!" and they say "ok, so Emperor's Children?" and you say "No, I want mine to be Iron Warriors!"

At what point is the 30k community being obstinate? Or is the new player the one being obnoxious? Who is trying to force their ideals on who? There's absolutely room for creativity, and most hobbyists I've met understand that different people paint at different speeds, but if you're not getting the kind of engagement that you want, instead of banging your head against a wall, maybe try a different hobby, game, or community?

drbored wrote:
I think one of the troubling things is that 30k is often seen as the gatekeep-y-est of the warhammer games, and for good reason.

30k is as close to a 'historical' game as GW have produced, and it's fictional history. Still, that sort of thing attracts a certain kind of player, people that care about the lore and consistency. There's still plenty of freedom, like playing traitor ultramarines or loyalist word bearers, but generally people still expect your Salamanders to be green and your Imperial Fists to be yellow.

People joke about breaking 'immersion' but that absolutely is a thing that 30k players try to hold onto. That's why they (I) get uppity when someone tries to come to the table with primaris models, or they try to bring competitive-ness into the game, when the old guard of 30k want to stick to what makes it the fiction-historical game that it is.

We know it's unbalanced, we know creative options are limited, but we still try to encourage (or bully) people into following a certain guideline in order to be seen as 'in'.

The result is, yes, you're going to have people ostracized. You're going to have people that are not going to have a good time in that type of community, and you're going to have a fishbowl of like-minded individuals that might have a hard time expanding their group or encouraging new players to take part in their hobby.

The flip side is that this is ALL based on opinion, and someone that wants your Salamanders to be green instead of pink is... well, that's their opinion. Nothing in the world is stopping you from painting your Salamanders pink, but someone that doesn't want to play against you is right in not playing with your army on the table.

It's a give-and-take, but that's true for 40k and AoS too, even to the extremes. You can paint all of your space marines as My Little Pony characters, or paint big-chested anime girls on your Tau riptides and hammerheads, but your opponent isn't obligated to play a game against you.

So let's take a step back and look at the situation from another angle.

You're a hobbyist that comes into 30k thinking 'boy space marines sure are cool!' and your local group tells you 'here's the starter set, here's the books, which legion are you interested in?' and you say "I want to paint my marines purple!" and they say "ok, so Emperor's Children?" and you say "No, I want mine to be Iron Warriors!"

At what point is the 30k community being obstinate? Or is the new player the one being obnoxious? Who is trying to force their ideals on who? There's absolutely room for creativity, and most hobbyists I've met understand that different people paint at different speeds, but if you're not getting the kind of engagement that you want, instead of banging your head against a wall, maybe try a different hobby, game, or community?

I don't think that's an issue for any given community-a community like yours that hews close to established canon and color schemes isn't inherently problematic.
The issue arises if your community looks at another community, sees them playing in a different fashion, and tells them they're wrong.

I've made clear many times that, for your own events, tournaments, gaming clubs, however you play; have your standards. But I'd like the same courtesy extended to me-I've got my standards. If you don't want to play against my army, then decline the game, but don't act like it's some moral righteousness. It's just preference.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


Also: Beer for beer, MDG?

Baaaaaaaaaad idea!

Not only have I a mere 3 cans to go? But I could drink even more. And one time, on Dakka, I got drunk, and because some neckbeard was claiming Finecast would literally melt into a blob in even medium heat, I put my oven on full blast, let it heat it up, then put a Liche Priest in the oven, for like, 10 minutes I think, then posted the results most ungraciously and nearly got permabanned.

I think the thread was something like “Money Where Your Mouth Is”. It might still exist 😂

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


Also: Beer for beer, MDG?

Baaaaaaaaaad idea!

Not only have I a mere 3 cans to go? But I could drink even more. And one time, on Dakka, I got drunk, and because some neckbeard was claiming Finecast would literally melt into a blob in even medium heat, I put my oven on full blast, let it heat it up, then put a Liche Priest in the oven, for like, 10 minutes I think, then posted the results most ungraciously and nearly got permabanned.

I think the thread was something like “Money Where Your Mouth Is”. It might still exist 😂

Oooo.....yeah, don't do that. And I have more than 3 left...

@drbored: I'd totally play your My Little Pony Salamanders.

I do very much endorse the “your standards needn’t be my standards”.

Outside of organised play, it’s down to you and your opponent to agree terms and what constitutes Sporting Behaviour etc.

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can value the looks of a game while still enjoying it just fine with unpainted minis.

How? That's like saying you value the taste of a good steak but you still enjoy it just fine if the cook burns it to charcoal. Games with unpainted miniatures have terrible aesthetic value, by participating in and endorsing those games you're admitting that you don't really care about the looks of the game.

And my standards may not be objectively true but they do represent the majority of the community. Most people value painted miniatures even when they refuse to paint their own and you have an obligation to do your part to contribute to an enjoyable game, much like you have an obligation to assemble your models, not use loaded dice, etc. And the existence of a group that enjoys using loaded dice (with the full knowledge of everyone involved) doesn't negate the general point that using fair dice, much like painting, is the expectation.

Extreme but valid example?

Disability.

Not everyone can paint their models. And I’d rather take on unpainted models than “proxy” forces.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can value the looks of a game while still enjoying it just fine with unpainted minis.

How? That's like saying you value the taste of a good steak but you still enjoy it just fine if the cook burns it to charcoal. Games with unpainted miniatures have terrible aesthetic value, by participating in and endorsing those games you're admitting that you don't really care about the looks of the game.

And my standards may not be objectively true but they do represent the majority of the community. Most people value painted miniatures even when they refuse to paint their own and you have an obligation to do your part to contribute to an enjoyable game, much like you have an obligation to assemble your models, not use loaded dice, etc. And the existence of a group that enjoys using loaded dice (with the full knowledge of everyone involved) doesn't negate the general point that using fair dice, much like painting, is the expectation.

You keep speaking as if you're the majority.

From my experience, everyone thinks painted models are cooler-but that's not in contention. What is in contention is the game not being worth anything with grey minis-and some people I've met share your views. They will only play with painted minis.
But a good chunk of people I know don't care-a painted mini is cool, if it's done well, but they still have a grand ol' time with unpainted minis.

Why are they wrong to have fun?

But JNA! If I don't judge you for everything you do wrong in my eyes, how can I validate my own existence???

Also, ignore Aecus Decimus. They have the worst takes in all of dakkadakka and I'm pretty sure they're here just to stir up trouble. They in no way represent any sort of valid opinion or group of individuals.