PDA

View Full Version : Poorhammer Etiquette



Solasun
24-03-2008, 01:20
If a player had bought a Necron Wraith, and if said player had a coastal base theme to their Necron army. How would you feel about this counts as. Consider that the top half of the wraith has been stuck on a base to look as if it is arching out of the water.

We can all agree that's fine, but what if said player did the reverse with the other half and had a diving wraith. Is this acceptable poorhammering or does it cross a line which stops at zombies bursting from their graves?

Lord Damocles
24-03-2008, 01:26
While I might raise my eyebrows at it, I guess it is clear what it is (assuming that you know what a wraith's tail looks like:D), and there's nothing too terrible about it.

So not something that I'd ever think of doing, but not something that I'd stop an opponant doing...

catbarf
24-03-2008, 01:26
I think it would look very strange and wouldn't make a lot of sense.

My rule of thumb is that if you can figure out what it is without being told, it's okay.

dneff23
24-03-2008, 01:27
If the individual is doing the conversion for effect and to save a few bucks, I would be more than happy to play against him or her :D However, I am an Ork player and love conversions that are cool and can save a few bucks :)

Col. Dash
24-03-2008, 01:28
Hmmmm if it is just one model used like this no problem. I would have issues if all of his army was like this. Definately less a problem if the bases were well done as opposed to simply glueing the model in place and painting it blue. I have made a model here and there out of spare parts too now and then due to a limitd budget but making an entire army on half the models is pushing it heheh

Shallowain
24-03-2008, 01:30
Where exactly do you see a problem here? I think it is totally acceptable.

killa kan kaus
24-03-2008, 01:31
I would let it slide but I am in the limited budget ork player category so I am not sure that I count.

Lord_Squinty
24-03-2008, 01:43
Where is there a problem in a player doing this to save cash?

You know that theyre both necron wraiths, if in doubt ask at the start of the game.

I've seen entire fantasy zombie units (2 or more) modelled as if they're emerging from the ground and all made from one box.

No harm done - you know what it is.

Give the guy/girl a break

Firaxin
24-03-2008, 01:44
I have no idea how that would physically work.

byteboy
24-03-2008, 01:49
Just like a friend of mine making Tau hoof prints in a sand base and playing them as "counts as" Stealth Suits. I mean, they are invisible after all..........I laughed and knew this person was tight on funds so it was cool. Pretty nice idea I may add.

Lord_Squinty
24-03-2008, 01:53
I have no idea how that would physically work.

For wraiths? - it would work well enough.
A lot better than the hoofprints in the sand that byteboy talks of....
But again - if you know what they are and are ok with it - wheres the big deal?

Kymmerus
24-03-2008, 02:21
Sounds clever really... if the army runs with a given theme and it can be exploited with half models looking the part then sure... I mean a diving wraith with the wail above water, and a painting / whatever effect to have a shadowed wraith body underwater sounds hella cool really...

Rioghan Murchadha
24-03-2008, 04:02
I'll start by saying I'm more on the gamer side than the hobbyist side, but that said, I've spent literally thousands and thousands of dollars on wargaming stuff. I've been playing GW stuff for 19 years now, and I would have no problem if you made an imperial guard army out of green/tan plastic army men, and dollar store tanks (as long as the troopers were on the right size bases ;)) But then, I only play to enjoy the game, not to oooh and ahhh over pretty colours on a model smaller than my thumb. (Not that I'm slagging people who do that, to each their own.)

Burning Star IV
24-03-2008, 07:03
For wraiths? - it would work well enough.
A lot better than the hoofprints in the sand that byteboy talks of....
But again - if you know what they are and are ok with it - wheres the big deal?

The big deal for me would be the ruined aesthetics. I play the game for the look more than anything.

That being said, eh, I'd still play him and say "oh yeah, that is cool." While thinking "Why would he do that?"

Varath- Lord Impaler
24-03-2008, 07:24
I think its acceptable only if you paint it to look like Free Willy. :P

Really though i wouldnt mind if its done well.

Being beaten by a vampire army which looks like someones dipped their army in rotting flesh and half of their zombies are Tombstones with flock on their base is annoying as hell, being beaten by a Vampire army where the units are fully ranked up and as you go deeper they go further into the ground and they are all painted brilliantly, thats cool

Playa
24-03-2008, 07:51
Hey,


i wouldnt mind if its done well

Cool modeling ideas aren't always satisfactory for gaming.

My issue is drawing real LoS to real models in a real game.
A base adorned only with a 'footprint' would not be fit for gaming.
One must model a 30mm tall shrubbery etc, on that 'Stealth' base.

An army doubled in size by halving the models suffers equally.
15mm tall minis would have a LoS/ Cover advantage in Real Life (tm).
Free Willy infantry would have to have to be based on 15mm "splashes".
IE, Infantry would have to be 30mm tall when one was done modelling them.

However 'cool' or 'well done', I'd say "No" unless proper size was observed.


Playa

Imperialis_Dominatus
24-03-2008, 07:52
I don't see the conflict here. It should be fine.

The Orange
24-03-2008, 08:08
Is this acceptable poorhammering or does it cross a line which stops at zombies bursting from their graves?

Ask yourself this. Do you want to be seen as a snob for not playing someone who tired to save some money? (or rather made their army bigger for a smaller price thus letting your field more of your own models) This is a game after all, if it's not going to really affect the fun had playing the game, then what's the problem?

Isambard
24-03-2008, 09:20
You may think it is fine now, but it one step away from coke cans as drop pods and fire warriors on surf boards as crisis suits (yes, I have played against them, yes, they looked crap and yes, I gave the guy such a whoopin' he should learn from it).

Imperialis_Dominatus
24-03-2008, 09:49
You may think it is fine now, but it one step away from coke cans as drop pods and fire warriors on surf boards as crisis suits (yes, I have played against them, yes, they looked crap and yes, I gave the guy such a whoopin' he should learn from it).

I think your 'one step' happens to leap a few more, but that's just me. Slippery slope much?

The Orange
24-03-2008, 10:02
coke cans as drop pods
1. That would first be a leap from conversions to "counts as" which is not the topic of this thread
2. Did you see the sweet ork mine layer in the Apocalypse book created from a soda bottle?


fire warriors on surf boards as crisis suits ... I gave the guy such a whoopin' he should learn from it).
Because conversion skills is a true test of a players ability to play the game, right? :rolleyes: I better run to ebay and buy me some pro-painted minis so I can win more, and while I'm at it, I better get some racing decals for my car, did you know each one add's 10 bhp? :angel:

Isambard
24-03-2008, 10:25
Because conversion skills is a true test of a players ability to play the game, right? :rolleyes: I better run to ebay and buy me some pro-painted minis so I can win more, and while I'm at it, I better get some racing decals for my car, did you know each one add's 10 bhp? :angel:

This was not a display of conversion skills. The player in mind was not of the mindset 'hey, look at these neat conversions I have done', they were 'I don't want to commit any time or money to the hobby, but my army won't win without crisis suits in it, so how can i get them whilst spending the smallest amount of cash and putting in the least effort'.

If that is the attitude you take you may as well you bits of paper with the name of the supposed model written on them.

I am not against poor-hammer per-se, but if you are going down that route you better have the skills to back it up if you dont want people laughing at you.

Stingray_tm
24-03-2008, 10:35
If the conversion looks good, than i would have no problem with a thing like that. But i wouldn't accept (at least not more than on a couple of occasions) an empty base representing a Tau Stealth Suit...

MacVurrich
24-03-2008, 10:38
Just like a friend of mine making Tau hoof prints in a sand base and playing them as "counts as" Stealth Suits. I mean, they are invisible after all..........I laughed and knew this person was tight on funds so it was cool. Pretty nice idea I may add.

Seen that done a few times (tourney as well)
one reason I think GW did allow more "stealth/camo" equipment in other armies, espcially when some of the Badger Core players started fielding a few armies like that :)

Talking with WHW mob the split wraith scenario is almost encourage under the conversion aspect of gaming

ctsteel
24-03-2008, 13:28
about the only issue I might have with it (might) is that line of sight to/from the model is likely to be an issue when the model is near terrain or other models. If it is just a tail sticking out of the water, where exactly does it exist above that for determining where the torso is (as per the rule on drawing LOS to the head/body).

if we came to some agreement before the game (or at least before we started any shooting) then it shouldn't be an issue after that. Creative modelling for fun/frugality shouldn't be penalised as long as it is within certain reasonable levels (its their model after all). But the onus should be on the owning player to point out that it is an oddity and discuss how to handle it in the game.

jfrazell
24-03-2008, 13:32
Where is there a problem in a player doing this to save cash?

You know that theyre both necron wraiths, if in doubt ask at the start of the game.

I've seen entire fantasy zombie units (2 or more) modelled as if they're emerging from the ground and all made from one box.

No harm done - you know what it is.

Give the guy/girl a break


Yes. I've also seen an entire necron squad modelled as if it were rising out of a crystalline structure. Looked very impressive.

Burning Star IV
24-03-2008, 15:42
Ask yourself this. Do you want to be seen as a snob for not playing someone who tired to save some money? (or rather made their army bigger for a smaller price thus letting your field more of your own models) This is a game after all, if it's not going to really affect the fun had playing the game, then what's the problem?

I would much rather be regarded as a snob by a gamer with a ridiculous army than waste 2 hours with a game I wouldn't enjoy.

Besides, does having standards really qualify one as a snob?

Isambard
24-03-2008, 16:12
It is not a case of being a snob, it is a case of letting people get away with crap. Which is not to be encouraged.

Poor-hammer is not always bad, there have been some really good units of Ork Kommandos posted on the net (ie the one that was a sign post that said 'Not a Kommando' on it) that were very in character and well executed. You need to have skills to get away with poor-hammer, anything else is just shoddy workmanship on a low budget.

void trekker
24-03-2008, 16:27
We can all agree that's fine, but what if said player did the reverse with the other half and had a diving wraith. Is this acceptable poorhammering or does it cross a line which stops at zombies bursting from their graves?

"Poorhammering?"

Boy, some of you guys must be children of privilege indeed. To me, if its a clever looking model, that's all I ask. Sounds neat to me. I probably would feel differently if he just laid bare metal on the table in two halves, but as long as it was nicely modeled and reasonably painted, I say go for it.

shaso_iceborn
24-03-2008, 16:31
You need to have skills to get away with poor-hammer, anything else is just shoddy workmanship on a low budget.

Not to be condensending here but how does one aquire skill if not by practice? The shoddy workmanship might be a first attempt at something.
Now with that all being said I expect attempts at converting not just pieces glued to a base. If I can see an attempt has been made to convert I might even help with suggestions to get the "full look" I think said person was after.

Iceborn

untimention
24-03-2008, 16:31
i think aslong as its stated what it is then thats fine... with things like apocolypse weird and wonderful things may enter the battle.

aslong you agree what it is and he's payed the pts then there is nowt wrong.

i mean the invisible frodo. 1 version was a base with a foot print... i mean there aight even a model and its classed as frodo.

Isambard
24-03-2008, 16:54
Not to be condensending here but how does one aquire skill if not by practice? The shoddy workmanship might be a first attempt at something.
Now with that all being said I expect attempts at converting not just pieces glued to a base. If I can see an attempt has been made to convert I might even help with suggestions to get the "full look" I think said person was after.

Iceborn

OF course, if it is a younger gamer or someone just into the hobby you always make exceptions (playing hints, conversion ideas, paint schemes etc), it is in the best interest of the hobby to be supportive of people just starting out. On the other hand, if this is someone of a reasonable age, who has been playing for a significant amount of time and has even brought his army to one of the largest tournaments in the country then yes, they need mocking.

dark blade
24-03-2008, 17:11
the closer for me is the intet with which the model was created. if the reasoning ws soly to save a few quid then i would probably let it go once or twice, not a whole armie, but with some of the more expencive models. if the intent was to give an advantagefor line of sight/shooting (like making a kneeling down wrathlord as i once came up aganst) then it would be a definate no becouse it is akin to cheating. if the idea is for a genuinly cool conversion then i think that it is accseptable. thats my take any way, make of it what you will, but in this case i would allow it.

Volrath
24-03-2008, 17:28
While on the subject, i'm starting VC and was actually looking forward to having some zombies coming out of the ground, not whole units that way mind you, but a fair amount. I thought this would be super fluffy and look really cool. This is shunned upon? Let's say i play in a RTT or GT, would i be marked down for this?


Most likely im not gonna buy zombies in the list, just raise them....but still, i think 1/3 or less coming out of the ground is awesome looking, thoughts?

Isambard
24-03-2008, 17:37
While on the subject, i'm starting VC and was actually looking forward to having some zombies coming out of the ground, not whole units that way mind you, but a fair amount. I thought this would be super fluffy and look really cool. This is shunned upon? Let's say i play in a RTT or GT, would i be marked down for this?


Most likely im not gonna buy zombies in the list, just raise them....but still, i think 1/3 or less coming out of the ground is awesome looking, thoughts?

If it is done well it is awesome and will earn you bonus points for conversions.

If you skimped and did proper ghetto-style poor-hammer you would fully utilize a box of 20 skeletons to make over 100 models - you only need a limb or so coming out of the ground, each skeleton having 4 limbs, a torso and a head then you could make many regiments.

Doing that would get you laughed at.

Son of Makuta
24-03-2008, 17:44
"Poorhammer" does sound a bit condescending you know... I'm always on the lookout for ways to do stuff as cheaply as possible. I'm a teenager, I have a limited source of income. When I bought two Slayers for my starting Cryx army, I also went and bought two Seether heads, so I can swap them back and forth, and also using the higher quality Slayer miniature as opposed to the rather crummy Seether. With some suitably 'crazy' poses (I'm planning one doing the Broodlord roar thing, with spikes and chains all over him, and another tearing some poor guy in half!) they'll fit as either type of warjack.

Is that particularly bad?

I'd personally rather dump a chunk of Green Stuff and a load of time into making a unique, original miniature than spend Ģ2 more, get the real one and have a mini that's exactly the same as everyone else's, even if it'll take no time at all compared to the massive conversion job, and even if it'll be better for WYSIWYG. Where's the fun in conformity? :p

A diving wraith seems pretty slick actually, to me. Like it's vanishing from sight. Think the monster's tail just vanishing around a corner, sorta thing. As for LOS, well meh... they have 3+ invulnerables, it's not like you're going to kill them. :p

And rising zombies. I personally wouldn't do a whole unit of 20 rising zombies, although I'd be inclined towards the one somebody mentioned with the front rank standing and the rear ranks getting progressively lower, that sounds cool. That is, if I could bring myself to use Zombies in an army anyway, or indeed play Vampire Counts to begin with. Undead don't tend to look amazing. (Ushabti are a different matter, but...)

Scelerat
24-03-2008, 18:07
What is the problem? God, some of you sound as if you did really have the authority to tell somebody off for the way he treats his army!
When I re-started WH, after like 7 years of not having anything to do with it and all my minis sold or given for free, I used paper sheets cut in the size of a regiment. Why? Because I couldn't afford to buy like 90 models all the sudden and paint them just to start playing again! Besides, before I buy a regiment, I have to make sure of two things: a) it looks cool, or would look cool with the adequate conversions. b) It suits my gameplaying style. To test b, you have to use some form of "counts as", and well, if I was to play with someone (mind you I never do tourneys or shop battles) and they refused to play with me because my army has one or two "paper regiments" while I'm saving money for the real ones, I'd shrug, think he's quite the anal retentive guy, and leave.

Anyway, as for the conversion the first poster talks about, I'd of course have no problem at all in allowing it. Not even if it was an obvious poor attempt at saving some money. Would I like it, if that was the case? No, I'd think to myself "why ruin a perfectly decent model?", and gladly play with the guy.

Isambard
24-03-2008, 18:21
if I was to play with someone (mind you I never do tourneys or shop battles) and they refused to play with me because my army has one or two "paper regiments" while I'm saving money for the real ones, I'd shrug, think he's quite the anal retentive guy, and leave.


No problems there, in a friendly game against a person who knows you are going to be proxying a unit or 2 there is no issue. But would you take them to a games night or a local tournament?

How about unpainted models in a tournament, is that ok with you? How about un-assembled models?

There have to be some standards to which players aspire to, in the case of conversions it is quite difficult as the same idea can look awesome or awful depending on how well it is executed. The whole point is that you need to be able to make it look good to get away with it.

Cenyu
24-03-2008, 18:27
We can all agree that's fine, but what if said player did the reverse with the other half and had a diving wraith. Is this acceptable poorhammering or does it cross a line which stops at zombies bursting from their graves?

As long as he didn't make two Necron Warrior regiments out of one in the same way I guess it's okay. :D

€: But then again, that could potentially be pretty hilarious if properly executed. The upper bodies of the Warriors modelled with life vests and the leg halves protruding from life belts. :D

jfrazell
24-03-2008, 19:16
Thats executive thinking Cenyu.

TheShadow3s
24-03-2008, 19:50
As long as it isn't bolt and screw, but he acutal model I wouldn't mind, and it should have more than a 3 second paint job on it + realisticly looking water on it.

Aside from that I don't mind, more of a personal choice for the one who is fielding it, and it would also be nice to know what it is before the game starts.

Eulenspiegel
24-03-2008, 19:57
Rubbish.
Absolute rubbish.

As long as the models are

- not modelled to gain maximum benefit for LOS issues
and
- are recognizeable for what they are,

there is no reason to frown upon conversions that may be deemed "cheap".
So what if someone doesnīt paint/convert his army as best he can?

A game is no worse just because the opponentīs models are not painted.

IJW
24-03-2008, 20:04
I'd never even heard of 'poorhammer' before this thread. I can't see a problem with the fish-tail Wraiths, they're supposed to be able to walk through solid matter, after all.

Thud
24-03-2008, 20:57
I completely agree with Eulenspiegel. As long as the model is recognizable and there's no obvious LoS advantage to it, I don't care what my opponant is fielding.

I always try to make my armies to the best of my abilities as a hobbyist, and due to the armies I play I don't have too many options to "cheap out" without it looking silly, but honestly, I'd much rather play against a great guy with an awful looking army, than some elitist prick with an 'Eavy Metal standard on every model.

Lord_Squinty
24-03-2008, 21:02
While on the subject, i'm starting VC and was actually looking forward to having some zombies coming out of the ground, not whole units that way mind you, but a fair amount. I thought this would be super fluffy and look really cool. This is shunned upon? Let's say i play in a RTT or GT, would i be marked down for this?


Most likely im not gonna buy zombies in the list, just raise them....but still, i think 1/3 or less coming out of the ground is awesome looking, thoughts?

Well, the best ones I've seen were designed as a unit - the rearmost ranks all had Gravestones (some only had Gravestones) and maybe a hand bursting from the earth, then progressivley raised by rank until the front rank and command were fully emerged. Looked Great. Whole unit had a feel to it and was done with less models than needed.

The Orange
24-03-2008, 21:05
It is not a case of being a snob, it is a case of letting people get away with crap.

Looking down on people who can't spend as much money on the hobby as you can is a snob in my book.

Having a person use full models that are painted does not mean that their army won't still look like crap. Yet no one can complain about that can they? That person, after all, did spent tons of $$ for their army. Besides that tons of people get away with using unpainted armies. So what? What makes a game fun is two people playing against each other, having nicely painted and converted models is only a bonus, not a requirement.

Burning Star IV
24-03-2008, 21:11
and they refused to play with me because my army has one or two "paper regiments" while I'm saving money for the real ones, I'd shrug, think he's quite the anal retentive guy, and leave.


Anal retentive maybe, or he plays for a different reason than just strategy and dice rolling. Oh boy. My carefully painted regiment of ____ just massacred your sheet of paper. Can't wait for the next game.

Not to say that testing via such means is just abominable in every circumstance, but if I agreed to a game and someone starts laying down the paper on the table saying "hey these are archers, okay?" I'll probably respond with. "Oh man I forgot, my car is on fire. I gotta go."

Isambard
24-03-2008, 21:18
Anal retentive maybe, or he plays for a different reason than just strategy and dice rolling. Oh boy. My carefully painted regiment of ____ just massacred your sheet of paper. Can't wait for the next game.

Not to say that testing via such means is just abominable in every circumstance, but if I agreed to a game and someone starts laying down the paper on the table saying "hey these are archers, okay?" I'll probably respond with. "Oh man I forgot, my car is on fire. I gotta go."

Indeed. I want to play a game against an opponent who is enjoyable to spend a couple of hours of my time with who has a nice army. In my experience the kind of people who bring unpainted/proxied/terribly armies to either tournaments or games nights (note, NOT friendly games) is generally not the kind of person I would enjoy spending time doing anything with.

IJW
24-03-2008, 21:29
Games nights aren't friendly games? :confused:

Flame Boy
24-03-2008, 21:32
I'd personally think it's a bit dodgy, but I wouldn't object. (I'd rather see full Wraith model split into two halves if it was phasing through a solid object like a wall section rather than diving into water, and it could be executed better) I guess it could be made to look good actually. It's certainly better than having a single Necron arm on a base sticking out of the ground, anyway.

I say go for it. You can always replace the diving tail with a full Wraith later if people's objections get to you once you have a bit more money.

Isambard
24-03-2008, 22:15
Games nights aren't friendly games? :confused:

I would define a friendly game as a pre-arranged game against a known opponent, for example me calling my friend Pete and asking for a 2000 point game against his Chaos next week.

Games nights are mainly pick-up games, you come in to play against an opponent who you may not know with an army you may not be familiar with.

In a friendly game there is a better chance you know what is what with your opponents forces. In a pick up game everything is quite possibly new and it may be unreasonable to remember the silver surfer model is actually a Tau Commander with plasma weapons and drone controller and etc etc etc.

GMMStudios
24-03-2008, 22:17
If you skimped and did proper ghetto-style poor-hammer

This little line alone makes me hesitant to reply, as I know you aren't being 100% genuine, however I will anyway because I am hungry and dinner is cooking.




Doing that would get you laughed at.

By...everyone? Is that what you imply? Ohh you mean *you* will laugh! That should make someone care, why?




How about unpainted models in a tournament, is that ok with you? How about un-assembled models?


It doesn't really matter, as the owner of the store isn't likely playing, and there isn't really anything you can do about it if it's a toureny. If it's a friendly game just don't play the guy if it gets your panties that twizzlered.




There have to be some standards to which players aspire to, in the case of conversions it is quite difficult as the same idea can look awesome or awful depending on how well it is executed. The whole point is that you need to be able to make it look good to get away with it.

Oh grand judge-master, please show me your works to aspire to!

It doesn't really matter if you like them or not. Its someone else's models. I dunno where you are from, but I am from America and over here people can do as they darn well please and if someone else doesn't like it they can go elsewhere.

Note that while I am a professional painter, that helps people aspire to having fully painted armies, I am ALL for people doing whatever necessary to play the game. If that means the kid has to use blank bases because it's going to be two months before he can have 500 points assembled and painted then lets get the dice out. You would seriously deny this example person a game?


Rubbish.
Absolute rubbish.

As long as the models are

- not modelled to gain maximum benefit for LOS issues
and
- are recognizeable for what they are,

there is no reason to frown upon conversions that may be deemed "cheap".
So what if someone doesnīt paint/convert his army as best he can?

A game is no worse just because the opponentīs models are not painted.

Agreed.


Games nights aren't friendly games? :confused:

To some people they aren't I guess.

End rant. Im normally a very nice guy but uppity people get me every time.

Easy E
24-03-2008, 22:24
"Poorhammer" is the only rational response. Why would anyone who believes in market theory and free-markets ever do anything but "Poorhammer". To not "Poorhammer" is simply irrational, and ALL market models are based on the idea of a rational decision maker. Therefore, I submit that to not "Poorhammer" is to hate Capitalism and Western Society.

Captain_Rory
24-03-2008, 22:43
Whats the problem? You know what it is, and it doesnt give a huge LOS advantage.

Lord Merlin
24-03-2008, 22:56
As long as the base was obviously water and it was obviosly half submerged it would be fine. Other wise it'd be like this.
"Why do you have half a wratith sticking out of that base?"
"Its diving out of the water."
"No its not its cut in half and glues to a blue base."
"No its in the water."
"Grr."
"Why'd you hit me?"
"You're an idiot."

jfrazell
24-03-2008, 23:13
The only thing that throws me is why water? As noted it would be much more cool if it were swimming into or out of a wall or something.

Isambard
24-03-2008, 23:22
This little line alone makes me hesitant to reply, as I know you aren't being 100% genuine, however I will anyway because I am hungry and dinner is cooking.

I was being a little sarcastic there :D




By...everyone? Is that what you imply? Ohh you mean *you* will laugh! That should make someone care, why?


I was perhaps overstating the mockery for comic effect. What is needed though is a community that values well painted and converted armies and supports those who are learning to do so but will not put up with lazy, sloppy or sub-standard workmanship from those who can do better.



It doesn't really matter, as the owner of the store isn't likely playing, and there isn't really anything you can do about it if it's a toureny. If it's a friendly game just don't play the guy if it gets your panties that twizzlered.


I wont, don't worry. But people like that do turn up at tournaments. They are the kind that get 0 for painting. I would put it that if you go to an event that is supposed to highlight the peak of the hobby then you should turn up with something that at least attempts the standard.



Oh grand judge-master, please show me your works to aspire to!


Ah, I see what you did there! Well done! I am an OK painter at best. I have a few nice conversions in my army that I am happy with. But I am always aiming to improve myself, I know I can not be Golden Daemon standard yet, but I hope that people can see how my style and skills have developed over the years.



It doesn't really matter if you like them or not. Its someone else's models. I dunno where you are from, but I am from America and over here people can do as they darn well please and if someone else doesn't like it they can go elsewhere.


This is where I demonstrate my WP of 12. No witty comeback is needed from me.



Note that while I am a professional painter, that helps people aspire to having fully painted armies, I am ALL for people doing whatever necessary to play the game. If that means the kid has to use blank bases because it's going to be two months before he can have 500 points assembled and painted then lets get the dice out. You would seriously deny this example person a game?


Shall I polish your trumpet after you have blown on it? As I said earlier it is the responsibility of more experienced hobbyists to not only make exceptions for younger or more inexperienced gamers but to go further and aide them where ever possible, from giving hits and tips to letting them slide past with unfinished models to loaning them your gear. But to see a long term gamer of a reasonable age try to use unpainted models in a tournament is beyond being reasonable.

Yes, I am a bit of an snob when it comes to the hobby, I don't mind the label at all, but I do what I can to encourage others to get the best they from themselves in the hobby and feel a level of scorn for those who want to include a unit in their force but cant be bother to pain/assemble/make a decent job of it.

Coke cans for drop pods? Yes, I know the resin ones are expensive but with a little effort you can make your own ones that look stunning. What you have done, good sir, sucks.

Grindgodgrind
24-03-2008, 23:46
Model your models exactly how you want them. As long as you like the way they turn out, then who gives a damn? As for 'Poorhammer', that just smacks of elitism.

Solasun
24-03-2008, 23:48
The only thing that throws me is why water? As noted it would be much more cool if it were swimming into or out of a wall or something.

Wow, I didn't really expect this size of a thread to spawn based on the query and I feel most able, and only have time to pitch in on this point, to answer this.

The Necron army theme is very much "ARISE MY MINIONS OF THE DEEP," with the Necron Lord facing the water with Staff and Orb upraised and the Warriors all standing on the beach away from the water, the Destroyers skimming over open water and well... Wraiths phasing up and down through the water like demented Loch Ness monsters.

Seaweed on some of the models and so on.

However I was unsure if the hypothetical Wraith tail model would be an acceptable Wraith or if it would get lumped into the "Spirit Host Empty Base" style of poorhammer that's pretty much disallowed outside of friendlies.

So that's why it's water and not a wall!

Rioghan Murchadha
25-03-2008, 02:50
Oh, dear lord... Isambard, GW has its hooks so deep into people like you it's scary. Warhammer has been a game longer than it's been a "hobby". (quotes are intentional).

Note the actual definition of hobby

1. an activity or interest pursued for pleasure or relaxation and not as a main occupation

GW started flogging their personal definition of hobby (being the purchase, conversion, assembly, and painting of GW models) in order to sell more crap. I can understand being down on someone bringing sub-par stuff to a painting concept, or dance off, but I don't see how the hell you can be that uptight about what people drop on the table to play a game with.

In fact, I put forth that if things like that make you so upset, then you're not actually engaging in a hobby at all, since the word itself implies pleasure and relaxation, over anal-retentive smugness.

Chaplain Ark
25-03-2008, 03:26
personally i see nothing wrong with it. my friend made a unit of necron warriors twice the size of the amount that somes in a box using only 1 box. it actually looks really sweet. some are falling apart, one in particular has his arm on the ground coming back onto his body by wires. it looks so sweet.

Isambard
25-03-2008, 05:34
Oh, dear lord... Isambard, GW has its hooks so deep into people like you it's scary. Warhammer has been a game longer than it's been a "hobby". (quotes are intentional).

Note the actual definition of hobby


GW started flogging their personal definition of hobby (being the purchase, conversion, assembly, and painting of GW models) in order to sell more crap. I can understand being down on someone bringing sub-par stuff to a painting concept, or dance off, but I don't see how the hell you can be that uptight about what people drop on the table to play a game with.

In fact, I put forth that if things like that make you so upset, then you're not actually engaging in a hobby at all, since the word itself implies pleasure and relaxation, over anal-retentive smugness.[/QUOTE]

Ah, I see your point, but did you see mine?

I am, and I am sure most people would agree, a more serious gamer. I play a lot and I like to play against people that enjoy the hobby and have a good looking army. Yes, I will enjoy a game less if I am playing with, or against, a bad looking force (though the opponent is more of an influence than this, but this thread has never been about the opponent, only their models).

I guess I have higher standards than most people here and, more worryingly, I am more keen to see those standards preserved in the hobby.

If terrible paint jobs/unpainted models/proxying etc are fine with you personally then that is your choice, but would you like it if your low standards were seen as the baseline in the hobby? I sincerely hope not.



In fact, I put forth that if things like that make you so upset, then you're not actually engaging in a hobby at all, since the word itself implies pleasure and relaxation, over anal-retentive smugness.
Now then children, calm down please. Don't make me tell my mum on you.

Imperialis_Dominatus
25-03-2008, 05:40
Hmph. Personally I'd play proxy armies, unpainted armies (seeing as I can't exactly hold someone to a standard I don't reach at all), counts-as armies, 'poorhammer' armies, etc. Honestly, if someone can't afford it or is innovative and creative enough to make a cool and cheaper way of representing whatever 'it' is, I'm all for it. Stick it to the man and all that.

But it's your time as well as mine, I suppose. If you don't want to play an army because of one of the above circumstances, I suppose the player you refused would be well within his rights not to want to play you in reciprocity.

Refusing to play someone because they have such an army because, in your experience, such players tend to be WAACkos or crap players is kind of stereotyping too... not generally encouraged.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 06:04
I despise (though I do try to hide it when playing the game) the elitist attitude that some players bring to the game. I am not an avid painter, i'm not very skilled with converstions. I do try though, I converted my Word Bearers army using the tabards and body pieces of thousand sons and such mixing and matching for some variet and theme. Yet only about 1/3 of my Chaos army is painted.

I've been turned down because of the condition of my army by people who are trying to "Preserve High Standards" in the game. That attitude is disgusting, it's a game meant to be played and enjoyed by a variety of people. When I play a well painted army I am truly wowed, because I know the commitment of time and energy that goes into doing it and doing it well.

Yet if I play some kid with a bunch of proxies who's played the game for a while but doesn't have the funds or a major desire to paint a lot I don't give him flak.

I don't consider it low standards, I consider it being good natured.

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 06:07
Model your models exactly how you want them. As long as you like the way they turn out, then who gives a damn? As for 'Poorhammer', that just smacks of elitism.

I think we'd have discerned precisely who gives a damn by now. As for the elitism, maybe, but hey, why pass up a catchy and apt title? Maybe my analogy here is a little weak, but did I become a film snob by thinking Catwoman or Gigli sucked?


T
It doesn't really matter if you like them or not. Its someone else's models. I dunno where you are from, but I am from America and over here people can do as they darn well please and if someone else doesn't like it they can go elsewhere.


Ahem...well then. Hopefully this is the same America (I mean, U.S. right? Thats in the Americas) Where I can choose to have standards in this hobby to which I have devoted so much time, and exercise my own discretion in my decisions to play or not play against certain others "involved" in the hobby. I'd hate to be forced to go elsewhere.


Oh, dear lord... Isambard, GW has its hooks so deep into people like you it's scary. Warhammer has been a game longer than it's been a "hobby". (quotes are intentional).

GW started flogging their personal definition of hobby (being the purchase, conversion, assembly, and painting of GW models) in order to sell more crap. I can understand being down on someone bringing sub-par stuff to a painting concept, or dance off, but I don't see how the hell you can be that uptight about what people drop on the table to play a game with.

In fact, I put forth that if things like that make you so upset, then you're not actually engaging in a hobby at all, since the word itself implies pleasure and relaxation, over anal-retentive smugness.

Well I'm glad someone has come to liberate us from the wretched talons of GW's raging capitalism. When will the tyranny end? I say we just boycott them entirely and force them out of business so we never have to deal with their crap again. I'm gonna go build a full chaos legion out of green plastic army men and Chinese take-out boxes as rhinos now, wish me luck!

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 06:10
If your "standard" includes belittling people for not devoting as much time and money into the hobby as you then I think I'm glad I don't have the same standard of Warhammer as you.

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 06:14
If your "standard" includes belittling people for not devoting as much time and money into the hobby as you then I think I'm glad I don't have the same standard of Warhammer as you.

It certainly doesn't. I'm quite tactful when face to face with another gamer. If you read my earlier post, you'd see how I would handle such a situation.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 06:29
Alright, while perhaps your tactful and polite to them. It's just unfortunate that so many people just make assumptions on a persons character if their entire army isn't painted to the highest standard. (this is an exageration of course but you understand)

I saw numerous comments in this thread that made unpainted armies equal to lousy bad personality players.

This has just never been my expireance, in fact the worst and most jerkoff players i've ever met have had the most wonderfully painted armies i've seen. The more I see someone judge others for what their army looks like the more I just want to punch that guy in the face.

It's sick, so what if it's a hobby that offers such an interesting aspect of both art and modeling. It doesn't give you a license to cut people down (even in your own mind) for not investing as much time in the game as you yourself might.

I try to convert creatively and paint as well as I can, but a lot of things go on in my life behind warhammer. People who don't see that and refuse to play me because a model lost an arm and I just hadn't found the time to glue it back on or I finished a squad a few weeks ago only had it base coated.

Heck, some of my units are just plain unpainted and have been for quite a while. Still.. no excuse.

People need to remember it's "Not About Them" so you don't like that he doesn't spend as much time assembling little plastic figurines and painting them to a skilled standard. Maybe he likes to play but you know.. just has other things going on in his life too.

The Orange
25-03-2008, 06:31
I guess I have higher standards than most people here and, more worryingly, I am more keen to see those standards preserved in the hobby.

Because everyone should live by your standards? :eyebrows: Because no one is worthy unless they live up to the level that you do?


Maybe my analogy here is a little weak, but did I become a film snob by thinking Catwoman or Gigli sucked?
You still saw the movies, didn't you? :p

It's on thing to judge something from experience, judging a player based on the paint on their models is not the same as judging a player by actually playing a game against them.


Where I can choose to have standards in this hobby to which I have devoted so much time, and exercise my own discretion in my decisions to play or not play against certain others "involved" in the hobby.
As I said before, how much do you care to be seen as an snob? If you don't care, then by all means enjoy building up that reputation and shunning people based on superficial observations ;).


I'm gonna go build a full chaos legion out of green plastic army men and Chinese take-out boxes as rhinos now, wish me luck!
Exaggerate much? :rolleyes:

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 06:38
@ Chaplain: Eh, well I definitely haven't devoted my life to this or any other hobby, and yeah, I've played some great looking armies with really disagreeable commanders. I don't think a person's army has any bearing on that person's personality, behavior patterns, etc. I'm looking at it strictly within the context of the game/ hobby.

My example would be the place I would go to play, when I was near a game shop. There were a couple of very nice looking armies with jerk owners. I wouldn't want to play these people and I generally would avoid them.

There were about 10 armies that looked like complete rubbish and had very agreeable people using them. I would chat with the people, joke, blah blah blah socialize whatever, and then politely turn down their request for a game.

Luckily, there were a few people with very well-painted armies who were also good company. I played against them.

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 06:45
@ The Orange: Yup, I saw the movies. I watched them once while cringing, sneering, and maybe wanting to puke a little.

I'm not judging the player but the army they're fielding

I'm not shunning the people, I'm shunning the waste of resin they put on the table.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 06:49
And the point is that you obviously don't value those people with armies that look like rubbish or it wouldn't be such a big deal. Thats my problem, you make judgments about their worthiness to play you. You don't think that they are worthy to play against you and your quality painted army because they don't invest as much time.

However polite you are it's still the message you would be giving to me. (I could be just plain wrong about this, but theirs a reason you won't play against them.)

I guess in the end, we are all going to do what we want and my opinions on what proper gaming Etiquette is rest solely with within myself (as any good opinion would). It just bothers me is all and I was angry at first on seeing a lot of the comments in this thread.

I guess it's really just that if I was very nice and polite and asked to play a game but then was politly turned down because of the quality of my army I would be furious and no matter how kindly someone talked with me or socialized I wouldn't be able to get over the fact that someone wouldn't even deign to put his army on the field because he doesn't like to "look" at my army because it ruins his enjoyment of the game and his aesthetic sense so hinges on me having 3 or more colours on my models.

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 06:58
@ Chaplain: I'm sorry, but yes, you're a bit off on this. This has absolutely nothing to do with the "worthiness of the person to play me" (did I mention I'm a terrible commander?). It isn't because they didn't invest enough time. It's because I was drawn to the game because it is aesthetically pleasing. If the opponent's army takes away what is for me the main selling point of the hobby, why would I play?

Shadowheart
25-03-2008, 07:19
This again. We only just went through it in that thread about painted armies. Same arguments. Same railing against people with standards.

I'm growing convinced that if you don't get accused of being an elitist, fun-hating prick, you're definitely doing something wrong. Because apparently the only way that won't happen is when you openly place yourself on the other side of the imaginary line by insisting you are carefree, fun-loving and "open minded", much unlike the horrible sort that doesn't share your opinion.

I find this whole blatant attempt at peer pressure disgusting. Power to anyone trying to oppose it.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 07:20
Then I guess it's a personal choice, yet my gut reaction without knowing you would be offense. I see the game as many things more than just an aesthetically pleasing modeling and painting hobby with a cool game to go along with it.

I see it as a social event, a game and a hobby all rolled into one, most of those facets being equal. I guess I just never think of one part of the game being more valued than another, so when I see it I assume it must be elitism or disdain.

Also shadowheart your both right and wrong, people shouldn't be pressured into playing with people they don't want to play with. Yet they should also be aware of the bigger picture, of how their behavior affects others. I would never dream of turning down someone because his army isn't up to my standards (if my standards involved fully painted armys) because I keep my standards to myself and don't try and project them onto other people as a requirment.

I think this game benefits from having a wide breadth of players not all of whom really enjoy painting and plenty of whom who do.

Champsguy
25-03-2008, 07:37
If terrible paint jobs/unpainted models/proxying etc are fine with you personally then that is your choice, but would you like it if your low standards were seen as the baseline in the hobby?

Hate to break it to you, but it IS the baseline of the hobby.

I don't care how an army looks, as long as it is clear that some degree of effort went into it. Effort requires no skill, no talent. Effort also requires no real money. Is the result commensurate with the skill and/or finances of the player? If yes, then I'm happy.

We have a 15 year old kid at our local store. He's irritating as hell. He can't play worth a damn. His army looks like crap. Most of it was given to him by players who have loads of old minis they didn't want anymore. A lot of it was "converted" (meaning, he's got a blob of green stuff with an arm sticking out of it). It's "painted" in that someone 10 years ago dipped half of it in a bucket of exterior house paint and promptly set it down in the dirt. I have no problem playing against Zack, however. He's irritating because he's 15. He can't play well because he's learning the rules. And his army is as good as it can be, given his extremely limited skill and even more limited finances. He put effort into his army, and that's enough for me.

My friend Nathan can't afford to spend a lot of money on a game of toy soldiers. He's got a wife and a young kid. Nathan plays orks, and he converts the hell out of them. We see tin can dreadnoughts and flower-pot stompas. I have no problem with this, because even though Nathan's conversions will never win a Golden Demon, he makes sure every model he uses is wisiwig, even if it's some homemade conversion involving pipe cleaner, drinking straws, and a spark plug. He puts effort into it.

If someone came to our store and refused to play Nathan or Zack because their armies weren't professionally painted, I'd suggest they find a different place to play. That attitude runs off a lot of customers.

The Orange
25-03-2008, 07:54
I find this whole blatant attempt at peer pressure disgusting. Power to anyone trying to oppose it.
So you don't mind being told to go away when you don't live up to someone else's standards? Despite the fact that you have spent money on the hobby already, you don't mind being looked down upon because the other guy spent more then you did? Or had more free time to develop their hobby skills?

I like fully painted armies, I usually try to keep myself form fielding anything but painted minis, but I'm the only one of my group who regularly fields a fully painted army. Despite that I still can (and do) enjoy playing against them because there's more to playing this game then looking at shiny models. Their are a lot of aspects about the 40k hobby that attract people to it, fluff, modeling, army building, playing games, conversions, etc. I personally love the painting aspect, but I fully accept that others are in the hobby for other reasons and I see no reason to diminish their enjoyment by making them fell inferior because they can't paint as much or as well as I can (though my standard is nothing spectacular either). How would you feel if someone turned you down because you didn't have a good story behind your army because they felt back story was the most important thing to the hobby? What if their was a sudden change in the community where no one cared about painted but rather a unique back story? And everyone shat on your ideas because they weren't original enough?

esk34
25-03-2008, 08:30
I think this idea od making more units on the cheap is great. I have been doing this type of thing myself for a while. I built a hellhound out of a cheap plastic kit using leftover tank bits from leman russes and chimera's, and am currently making Heavy bolters for my sqauds using HB's from Sisters Imolators. I am hoping they look cool when finished.

Well I do try to paint my mini's, however painting them well is something I still cant do. I do try to most of my stuff painted, but it will never happen as I simply don't have the time.

I will play pretty much anybody, however there are some people I wont play again mainly because of there win at all costs type attitudes and inability to have fun.

twj
25-03-2008, 10:49
The only time I felt shocked by the standard of painting was when I saw a guy with a beautifully painted army refuse a game with someone with a WIP army. However, I later discovered that this guy's army was commission painted!!! lol

Isambard
25-03-2008, 10:59
I wouldn't refuse to play against a WIP army (though I would not expect to see them at a formal gaming event). What I do expect from other gamers is progress. To have an unpainted or partially painted army and to not make any progress with it means it is no longer WIP.

The store where I did most of my gaming at uni had a veterans night policy that WIP armies were fine as long as you could demonstrate progress, an ethos which I think is both fair and encouraging. It allowed players to try out new units in their armies and experiment with tactics but also encouraged them to finish their armies.

I don't condone forcing standards on people but I do expect people to have standards and that over time these standards will improve. Stagnation is idleness and we all know idleness begets heresy.

jfrazell
25-03-2008, 12:35
Wow, I didn't really expect this size of a thread to spawn based on the query and I feel most able, and only have time to pitch in on this point, to answer this.

The Necron army theme is very much "ARISE MY MINIONS OF THE DEEP," with the Necron Lord facing the water with Staff and Orb upraised and the Warriors all standing on the beach away from the water, the Destroyers skimming over open water and well... Wraiths phasing up and down through the water like demented Loch Ness monsters.

Seaweed on some of the models and so on.

However I was unsure if the hypothetical Wraith tail model would be an acceptable Wraith or if it would get lumped into the "Spirit Host Empty Base" style of poorhammer that's pretty much disallowed outside of friendlies.

So that's why it's water and not a wall!

Thats interesting. A sort of Lovecraftian theme then. Have you thought about some destroyers likewise coming up from the water? If its a theme then its good by me.

Any pics?

Adra
25-03-2008, 12:56
The cron army sounds really good to me. very interesting. i dont see why an odd model that bends the hight rules a little should matter. they are still size 2 right so just work it out from the terrain sizes you have decided to use. the kneeling wrathlord example would hardly ever work as its still size 3 no matter if its laying down or doing a high jump.

i really dont like that term of poorhammer as if all convertions that use less model are cheap. the tau worriors on surf boards as crisis teams would still need the weapons of a crisis suit to be legal right? wouldnt that, in fact, be more expensive as you would need crisis models and fire worriors.

G

twj
25-03-2008, 13:05
Any pics?

I second that, pictures which illustrate some of the issues discussed would be brilliant, especially regarding some of the more dubious "poorhammer" ones. It is hard to make an informed decision about whether something is viable without seeing it!!

jfrazell
25-03-2008, 13:18
The cron army sounds really good to me. very interesting. i dont see why an odd model that bends the hight rules a little should matter. they are still size 2 right so just work it out from the terrain sizes you have decided to use. the kneeling wrathlord example would hardly ever work as its still size 3 no matter if its laying down or doing a high jump.

i really dont like that term of poorhammer as if all convertions that use less model are cheap. the tau worriors on surf boards as crisis teams would still need the weapons of a crisis suit to be legal right? wouldnt that, in fact, be more expensive as you would need crisis models and fire worriors.

G

Yes when I was creating my demon army, using converted beastment, I was accused of trying to be cheap. Then I tallied up the cost of the conversion (minis + $3 heads for each converted demons + metal and expensive dragon ogres, shaggoths and spawn) and it shut them up.

Shadowheart
25-03-2008, 13:36
How would you feel if someone turned you down because you didn't have a good story behind your army because they felt back story was the most important thing to the hobby?
As with all of your other hypothetical situations, I'd imagine I'd feel a bit miffed. That's right, I would not be happy. Shock! Horror! I for one don't expect every other gamer to be working towards increasing my personal happiness. I accept that other people's desires may not be compatible with my own. I would not expect someone else to satisfy themselves with less because it would be convenient to me if they did so. Basically, I can live with being turned down.

Meanwhile, how would they feel if they knew that they couldn't turn me down without me waving their finger at them and, with a good deal of public support, berate them for being elitist and a disgrace to the hobby? At a guess, they'd feel either disgusted, like me, or more likely they'd feel afraid enough to submit to the group's expectations.

I don't think it's the hypothetical them that are making an effort to make anyone feel inferior, I think it's you. They're saying "I don't want to play against you", you're saying "that's a terrible thing to do". Moreover, they're just saying it to the person in question, whereas you're telling it to people in general.

The "most important rule" says both players should enjoy themselves. That's not an obligation to enjoy yourself as long as your opponent does. There's nothing wrong with making sure you'll enjoy yourself and refusing a game before you even are "both players". And there's no need to read every refusal as "you're beneath me, scum".

ehlijen
25-03-2008, 14:08
Have you though about giving another wraith two tails? or using the tail in some other conversion?

I agree a wraith rising from the water could look very cool, and a tail sticking out could work, but I can't help think that it wouldn't look as good in comparison and could instead be used for other conversions.

I would play you either way, as it's obvious that you intend to make a cool army and (I assume) have a fun game with it.

It's all in the player. Does he make minis out of spare bits because he can't afford real ones? That's cool. Does he do it because he has the bits and is bored? That's cool. Does he do it because he thinks it's a cool conversion? That's cool. Does he use the same models for whatever powergaming army of the week he has currrently come up with (they're IW CSM, not their death guard, no their thousand sons, no wait...)? Sorry, I'd rather have fun game.

About standards: This is not a cheap hobby. A certain standard is built in by that fact. That standard is: using some form of GW models, preferrably the right ones, or something else that is converted to look right. Hopefully fully assembled (or the bits present in the case of damage. It happens, no drama) but that's not required if it's WIP. That's it for standard. Painting is not required as long as it's apparent you intend to get around to it some day.
The hobby has 3 parts (possibly more, but 3 for me): building, painting, playing. There is no reason they must be done in that order. (Though obviously some building may be required first.) You want to play before you paint, no problemo. You want to play using carefully handpainted pictures of the models on pieces of paper? Thumbs up here, it's hobby.

But when it comes to simply using marked paper/other non effort methods, you're not enjoying the hobby, you're playing a wargame. Could be any wargame. That's not a bad thing, and if informed prior I'll play (I like wargames in general), but it's not 40k the hobby (as it lacks building and painting). As such, it shouldn't be done in hobby events as these are events where hobbyists want to play other hobbyists in the hobby of 40k (or whatever miniature game you're using).

intellectawe
25-03-2008, 15:39
I'll start by saying I'm more on the gamer side than the hobbyist side, but that said, I've spent literally thousands and thousands of dollars on wargaming stuff. I've been playing GW stuff for 19 years now, and I would have no problem if you made an imperial guard army out of green/tan plastic army men, and dollar store tanks (as long as the troopers were on the right size bases ;)) But then, I only play to enjoy the game, not to oooh and ahhh over pretty colours on a model smaller than my thumb. (Not that I'm slagging people who do that, to each their own.)

You are one wise hobbyist... You need to post more please.

...

Need more of you around Warseer and less of.... everyone else :)

Anyways.... That necron player sound smart to me, and I would have no issue playing him. Its a game. Whats the issue here anyway? Jealousy that he found a way to save a buck?

Griffin
25-03-2008, 16:12
Personally I'm a sucker for fielding fully painted armies, and I spent almost a year before fielding my first army. In that time I read, discussed and generally kept my interest in the hobby going while I patiently painted and assembled a model at a time.

I'm a Bad painter.
I'm a bad assembler.

I take ages to get anything done, and you know what ? If I can paint for 10 minutes a day for a year to get my army done to the best of my abilities, someone else can too. Kids, Jobs enc. It's no excuse. I got up at 5, got ready for work, maby painted half a basecoat, finished my cofee and still got my army done. I will play guys with unpainted armies, and I won't say anything. I will play poor hammer armies cause I know some people struggle to afford plastic crack. I accept that, but a year or 2 down the line there had damn well better be a heck of a improvement, either in creative conversions or poorhammer stuff getting gradually replaced.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 16:22
Well I guess the diffrence is that you think people who play Warhammer MUST paint, and if they DON'T paint then they are falling short of what you think is right for the hobby.

Now I'll support part of that, Painting is obviously an important aspect of the hobby. Perhaps one of the most important aspects of the hobby next to modeling and gaming. Yet in non-tournament friendly games I think that the judgement's people make towards people who aren't motivated to paint is wrong.

Eulenspiegel
25-03-2008, 16:50
Iīm putting up a petiton so the word "poorhammer" is being fragged by some sort of bad-word filter.
I donīt want to see it spread, and I donīt want to say Iīve been there when it was invented ...:cool:

ObiWan
25-03-2008, 17:11
The idea sounds cool to me, and I'd allow it without a second thought.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 17:15
poorhammer become Finacial Challenged Tabletop Wargaming and Modeling?

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 17:25
So you don't mind being told to go away when you don't live up to someone else's standards? Despite the fact that you have spent money on the hobby already, you don't mind being looked down upon because the other guy spent more then you did? Or had more free time to develop their hobby skills?


You're willingly ignoring the point, aren't you? This is a very simple concept you're missing here. Please take time to absorb this before posting:The notion that players are being looked down on because they didn't spend as much cash on their army is one of the most ridiculous I've heard in the thread. The. Gamer. Is. Not. Being. Belittled.

The decision to not play against them is due to the armies...thats the army they field...as opposed to the person himself. I've never told another gamer "well friend, I'd prefer it if, instead of a 1500 point game, you just went away...y'know, because you, as a human being, don't live up to my standards."

It seems you're convinced that we who care about aesthetics believe we're a part of a higher echelon of humanity than the others, but it isn't the case. Please try to look at this objectively instead of saddling up your high horse and crusading for something which isn't even the issue.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 17:33
I think the point is that when you value aesthetics more than just spending some time playing the game while talking to a guy and hanging out (Even if his army isn't up to your personal standards of painting and modeling) that can be the negative thing. Perhaps you'd enjoy the game more if his models where well painted, but overall how much do you lose playing against a guy with a WIP or even just poorly done army if he is also fun to be around.

Perhaps it's not commenting on that person, but it does show that you won't be bothered to make the small sacrifice to play a game with a person if you don't think his army is painted well enough or modeled well enough.

I just have a hard time seeing how ones enjoyment of the gaming aspect so completely hinges on the models on the field rather than the company and the skill of the player.

I can sacrifice time and effort to create a beautiful army. I can also highly value good painting and modeling and still play a game against a crummy army and not waste a moment of my time. You'll still have fun, if you actually want to.

Your enjoyment of the game is up to you, I challenge anyone to say that they can't enjoy a game if both armies aren't painted up all pretty (honestly). What kills games is people, and difficult or juvenile personalities. Not the models on the field.

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 17:41
I think the point is that when you value aesthetics more than just spending some time playing the game while talking to a guy and hanging out (Even if his army isn't up to your personal standards of painting and modeling) that can be the negative thing. Perhaps you'd enjoy the game more if his models where well painted, but overall how much do you lose playing against a guy with a WIP or even just poorly done army if he is also fun to be around.

Perhaps it's not commenting on that person, but it does show that you won't be bothered to make the small sacrifice to play a game with a person if you don't think his army is painted well enough or modeled well enough.


If its WIP, I'll play him and, while I won't enjoy it much, I know that sometime we can set up another game and it will e a completed work. If it's just a rubbish army, then how much do I lose? Depends on how much time the game takes I guess. 1-2 hours, maybe? If I'm wasting that time, I'd just as soon go to work, where at least I'm making money while not having fun.

If I "won't be bothered to make the small sacrifice" to play the game, why am I automatically the inconsiderate one? Why is the burden of sacrifice on me? There are two players, after all.

Chaplain of Chaos
25-03-2008, 17:47
See I just don't understand why you don't having fun playing an unpainted army. I just don't get it, we are masters of our own leisure. Why not choose to have a good time even if the army is not fully painted. It's a simple choice.

Also, the point of making a sacrifice and playing a game with somebody who's army doesn't meet your standards (which I don't consider a sacrifice at all because I enjoy the game as well as the painting) is that you bring him enjoyment and if you actually cared you would enjoy it too. So it's not really a sacrifice at all.

It's the attitude that "Games aren't enjoyable unless both armies are fully painted" that gives your aesthetic sense the wiff of elitism. While having standards that are high is good, it's a two sided coin by refusing to play somebody because of your standards you impose those standards upon him.

So if somebody wished to play you, they would need to make further sacrifices of time and money (perhaps sacrifices they can't afford) to rise to meet your standards. Their is more burden on you to come down to their level for a short while and play a friendly game than for him to spend hours or days working at a well painted and modeled army.

Adra
25-03-2008, 17:51
You're willingly ignoring the point, aren't you? This is a very simple concept you're missing here. Please take time to absorb this before posting:The notion that players are being looked down on because they didn't spend as much cash on their army is one of the most ridiculous I've heard in the thread. The. Gamer. Is. Not. Being. Belittled.

The decision to not play against them is due to the armies...thats the army they field...as opposed to the person himself. I've never told another gamer "well friend, I'd prefer it if, instead of a 1500 point game, you just went away...y'know, because you, as a human being, don't live up to my standards."

It seems you're convinced that we who care about aesthetics believe we're a part of a higher echelon of humanity than the others, but it isn't the case. Please try to look at this objectively instead of saddling up your high horse and crusading for something which isn't even the issue.

Oops i LOLed. Seriously if you are assuming that a comment on prsons personal taste and skill isnt a comment on the person then you are sadly in denial. i have no dout that a seriously negative comment against your army would, even if it is just a little, distress you in some way and you would be unable to not take it a little personnaly regardless of the high grounded retoric. if you paint a work of art and a person says "no you cant hang that up next to my painting because it isnt good enough" what manner of person is unable to take that as both a personnal and professional insult. water off a ducks back is all well and good but by the time you say that its too late, you already have taken it personaly. try and remember that intention of comment has both delivery and reaction and even if your comments are not against a peronal your comments about something they have pride in will probably be taken as an insult on themselves, and be seen that way by most others in the vacinity whether they agree with u or not.

p.s. sorry for spelling no time to spellcheck :P

G.

Champsguy
25-03-2008, 17:51
I've never told another gamer "well friend, I'd prefer it if, instead of a 1500 point game, you just went away...y'know, because you, as a human being, don't live up to my standards."


And yet, I have said similar things. I'm usually a bit more discrete about it. Ususally.

If you don't like a guy, don't play with him. If he's not fun to play against, don't play with him. If he smells bad, don't play with him. But you don't like the way his army is painted? Now you're talking about inconsequential crap. Now, I will pressure someone into getting a better looking army. We've had the coke can drop pods, paper rhinos, the coffee cup carnifex. I don't mind playing against that once or twice, as long as we aren't doing it three years down the road. I also want to play against nice looking armies. I paid a lot to have my army painted nice. I'd kind of like to be able to face an opponent with a similar level of painting. But conversions to save money? By all means, convert away.

Sholto
25-03-2008, 17:57
I can see why some people would want to only play against fully painted armies. We are all in this hobby for our own reasons, and if you are in it to see fully painted 40k armies slugging it out then you are entitled to play those games and only those games where the minis have had a colour bath. Fine by me.

That also means I can understand the player that is in the hobby for the less visual aspects, and enjoys the mechanics of the game more than the creative side. Like I said, fine by me.

Would be nice if people could just live and let live on the subject, and stop being so precious about their own point of view.

And I am with Eulenspiegel as regards "Poorhammer". It's a ****** word.

Sholto

jfrazell
25-03-2008, 18:13
I just have a hard time seeing how ones enjoyment of the gaming aspect so completely hinges on the models on the field rather than the company and the skill of the player.

I can sacrifice time and effort to create a beautiful army. I can also highly value good painting and modeling and still play a game against a crummy army and not waste a moment of my time. You'll still have fun, if you actually want to.

I agree wholeheartedly. I'm on self imposed exile from tourneys at this point because I inevitably run into That Guy and it ruins the whole day for me. I'd rather BS around paper chits than a game with a twit at this point. Life's too short. So the status of their minis is not especially relevant to me if I understand what those minis represent.

IJW
25-03-2008, 18:17
And I am with Eulenspiegel as regards "Poorhammer". It's a ****** word.
Thirded, if that's a word. My spellchecker doesn't think it is... :(

The Orange
25-03-2008, 18:32
Seriously if you are assuming that a comment on persons personal taste and skill isn't a comment on the person then you are sadly in denial.

QFT.
The fact is when you deny playing someone because of the state of their army you are indirectly making comments on them.

Oh this guy has what looks to be "poorhammer" conversions, their's no way I could have fun playing against them = you didn't spend as much cash as a normal army that size would cost, therefore your not worth my time

It's one thing to judge someone from experience, i.e. the guys had the same army for the last 8 months, with no improvements, and every time you play that person the games a let down. It's another thing when you look at a new guys models and flatly refuse them.

And no doubt this refusal will be in front of the gaming community as well, being a pick up game in a store, so said players are not only being turned down, but turned down in public to boot. Thats likely going to turn people off to the hobby, not encourage them to keep trying.

But if it floats your boat, by all means go ahead, as I said before you'll just foster a reputation of being somewhat a snob, as that's usually what people who get turned down will think about you. And if your setting your selves up to expect poor games when the opponent has poorly painted armies, etc. well you've set yourself up for a self fulfilling prophecy haven't you?

Cornelius
25-03-2008, 18:41
"Aesthetics" is just another word for snobbery.

jfrazell
25-03-2008, 19:08
Each to his own. I'd also note that the level of painting is not really in discussion in this circumstance.

Burning Star IV
25-03-2008, 19:21
Well alright then. I still disagree with Orange, Adra, etc. wholeheartedly, but it seems that we have such fundamentally different viewpoints on the matter that no one will concede a point. If you guys really believe that the matter is a personal one instead of strictly concerning the appearance of models then so be it, but I hope that you someday realize that there is real objectivity, and that commentary on one thing does not necessarily entail commentary on another.

I mean it really doesn't matter. I'll play who I play, and for whatever reasons, and you guys will do the same.



"Aesthetics" is just another word for snobbery.

Laughable. At least the other guys gave somewhat coherent arguments.

Cornelius
25-03-2008, 20:08
Laughable. At least the other guys gave somewhat coherent arguments.

No, I'm serious, but I didn't (and I still don't) have the extra energy to waste on laying out the argument here in full, especially with such explicit snobbery as witnessed in your replies present ("laughable" just blinks "QED" on me). Suffice it so say that you would know what I mean if you ever picked up and digested a book on sociology.

And no, I'm not looking for a flame war.

Peril
25-03-2008, 20:14
Look its pretty simple.

No one should feel forced to paint and use 100% whole GW models to play the game.
No one should feel forced to play an opponent they do not want to play.

I happen to think anything is fine as long as the player isn't doing something to gain an advantage from the rules, but all of you screaming "Don't enforce your standards on me!" to the "painted-only" crowd are really just trying to enforce your standards on them.

Just agree to disagree and not play each other. No hard feelings. See how easy that is?

Ronin_eX
25-03-2008, 20:37
I will support anyone's right to have fun no matter what and to play whoever they wish. No one should be forced into playing a game they don't want to but this:


If you guys really believe that the matter is a personal one instead of strictly concerning the appearance of models then so be it, but I hope that you someday realize that there is real objectivity, and that commentary on one thing does not necessarily entail commentary on another.

Makes me raise my eyebrow a little. So you are saying that when saying that the painting or conversion work of a model is poor or below your personal standard you will not enjoy playing against that army. I can get that even if I don't agree with it in the slightest; that is simply a difference of opinions on our part and you are welcome to it.

But how in the ever loving hell is it not a personal statement on the owning player. Who spent the time (or didn't as the case may be) painting the models and converting them? I certainly haven't gone down to my LGS and picked up some minis which promptly put themselves together and than gave themselves a bad paint job. In the end you are making a comment on the skill of the owner and there is no other way about it. If the painting and conversion work is sub-par by your standards then guess what? You have made a comment that the creator of such works has made them sub-par. You may not be saying he is a bad person but by criticizing his work and refusing to play him you have certainly made the issue personal.

So don't play people that don't live up to your standard, that's fine, but at least confess to your root motivations and don't try to cover it up by saying "it's objective!" When you make a judgement about something the person created you are making a personal judgement about their skill, not the army as it has no way of effecting how it will look at the end of the day. It wasn't the one who picked up the super glue and the paintbrush and so you can't judge the skill that went into creating it without judging the skills of the creator. Remember that GD awards go to people not the models that win them. ;)

Cornelius
25-03-2008, 20:45
If you guys really believe that the matter is a personal one instead of strictly concerning the appearance of models then so be it, but I hope that you someday realize that there is real objectivity, and that commentary on one thing does not necessarily entail commentary on another.


It's like saying: "I find everything written in a post by Burning Star IV to be juvenile snobbishness, but it has no bearing whatsoever on the poster, just his comments." Things don't work that way.

Shadowheart
25-03-2008, 21:03
It's the attitude that "Games aren't enjoyable unless both armies are fully painted" that gives your aesthetic sense the wiff of elitism. While having standards that are high is good, it's a two sided coin by refusing to play somebody because of your standards you impose those standards upon him.

So if somebody wished to play you, they would need to make further sacrifices of time and money (perhaps sacrifices they can't afford) to rise to meet your standards. Their is more burden on you to come down to their level for a short while and play a friendly game than for him to spend hours or days working at a well painted and modeled army.

QFBS.

I'm not even sure how to reply to that one. How the hell does one impose standards by refusing to engage in an activity with someone that doesn't meet them? What kind of screwed up world is that inside your head? Do cars drive people in there?

These things have to work both ways. If they don't, then there's no thing. And then there should be no problem. What's so hard to swallow about "no thanks, I don't want a game"? Especially concidering how few "painted only" gamers there actually are.

And drop it with the insinuations about us being unable to enjoy doing stuff with people unless it meets our exact preferences. That's a load of rubbish and I shouldn't even have to be pointing that out.

Fact is though that you chose to spend your time (some of it), playing 40K. I'm sure you also enjoy just hanging out and talking with people, but sometimes, you chose to play 40K. That's a pretty specific thing to do really, and the vast majority of people out there, if they wanted to join you, would have to invest a lot of time and money beforehand. So, what, are you an elitist, trying to impose 40K on them?

What I chose to do is only a shade more specific than what you chose to do. The difference is that, luckily for you, you're very unlikely to be approached by someone that doesn't actually play 40K.

In any case, it's not a question of being unable to enjoy something. I mean, I'd enjoy sitting around watching television and masturbating all day, at some level, but that doesn't mean that that's what I chose to do. And I'm sure I could find enjoyment in dating a girl that doesn't read books without pictures, but that doesn't mean I feel obliged to try. Someone will undoubtedly concider that elitist, and I welcome it as confirmation that I'm not totally getting things wrong.


And no doubt this refusal will be in front of the gaming community as well...
Just because you're saying something in public you don't have to turn it into a public statement. Two people can talk without involving everyone around them. I'm guessing you wouldn't, but you could.

Orwin
25-03-2008, 21:05
Do people really get annoyed if they find that someone converted models in order to spend less money? I don't think i have to remind you of the obvious: warhammer is a very very expensive game. I also think that sometimes GW doesn't do such a great job in order to ask for what they do. Come on, creativity should be one of the main issues of the hobby. Why don't the guys who get annoyed by knowing that the opponent built more for less go and buy models for the "cheap" people, then? Jesus.

jfrazell
25-03-2008, 21:07
I think the topic has gone maddeningly OT Orwin. Is there anyone out there who will get annoyed if someone converts to save money? I'd add the codicil that the conversion would have to be decent. Ironically conversions often cost more than just buying a GW model.

Orwin
25-03-2008, 21:25
Sometimes...the earth-emerging zombies are a good example where you can field a base attached to an earth-emerging arm and it will count as a zombie :P it can work, sometimes. I think that it is amazing that a hobby that started as a lot of improvising spawned players that will refuse to play against outdated codexes, fair house rules and that somehow tend to turn their heads upon customizing. Oh, do they really believe that warhammer can only be fun with GW models because the local store tells them so? We should be very, very aware of GW and most other companies try to shove down our heads. The miniatures and the hobby as a whole should be a way to have some fun, and not the opposite, where you only have some fun if you have the miniatures (all of them, and don't forget WYSIWYG) and when you are following GW's canon and "preachings"

Freakiq
25-03-2008, 21:34
Just like I wouldn't watch Lord Of The Rings if the monsters were only guys with signs saying "cool monster" I wouldn't play against an unpainted army.

I'm into this game because I want to command my cool looking army against my mates cool looking army on a cool looking table.

Seeing my grey plastic men beat his plastic men on a kitchen table wouldn't spark the same feeling of two armies fighting.

If I'm not going to enjoy myself then why waste my time?

jfrazell
25-03-2008, 21:41
Well here's my Q then back to the topic itself:
So what if your friend brings the army of ultimate grey doom. Would you not play your firend, because their army is not painted? Its a question not an indictment and I think thats where the bifurcation is going. Some are more interested in the banter, some in the look of the minis, some have the blessing of both.

But now back to the topic. Do conversions that save money, if reasonably done, cause a problem.

Eulenspiegel
25-03-2008, 22:15
Just like I wouldn't watch Lord Of The Rings if the monsters were only guys with signs saying "cool monster" I wouldn't play against an unpainted army.
Amazingly irrelevant of the topic.

Guys. We are gamers, we are NERDS.
Everybody looks down on us, everybody. (Ok, maybe weīre better than emos ...)

Now, who of you geeks relly is that desperate and not aware of his geekyness, that he has to establish a pecking order? Just to have someone to look down to?

My-homemade-optimups-prime-suit-is-better-than-yours!
My-legolas-costume-is-better-than-yours-because-you-have-one-button-too-few!
Your-vulcan-ears-look-more-artifical-than-mine!

Your-army-is-sub-standard! My-painted-little-men-are-not-going-to-fight-yours!

rodmillard
25-03-2008, 22:23
I came into this debate rather late, but...

Most GW run tournaments (at least in the UK) insist that a conversion be 50% GW parts. In the original example the guy has decided to use the front 50% for one model, and the rear 50% for another.

I would have no problem with this. I also have no problem with the "emerging" zombie models, although for personal preference I only use them myself to represent units raised by my army, and not units bought with my XXXX points.

If you have a problem with someone buying one model from GW for X pounds and converting it for use as 2 figures, would you also have a problem with someone who bought 2 of the same model on ebay for the same (or less) ammount of money?

GMMStudios
25-03-2008, 22:27
Eulenspiegel I would ask you to marry me but I have a feeling, being a nerd too, you are male.

deathdealer
25-03-2008, 22:35
Theres absolutely nothing wrong with using conversions, i myself have made a plastic SM chaplain out of tactical, command squad and chaos warrior bits, a couple of tankbustas using the new ork boyz sprues and have set aside a couple of hours this saturday to build up my own boss snikrot to be used the following day, which will be more than a boy with a couple of knives. I think you have to look at different situations though, with the wraiths i think its ok, though i would prefer my opponent to have one complete wraith in he unit, saying that though how many necron players can you find whose wraiths haven't snapped in half without pinning? I wouldn't accept the invisible stealthsuits, the models are plastic and can be cheap if you look in the right places. As for the zombies, i would accept body upwards, i know people who have taken the body parts on the standard bits and cut em down and stuck limbs to them. One arm sticking out the ground is too far IMO.
As for people saying they wouldn't play someone if their amy wasn't painted, thats just downright ridiculous. Its like saying you may only join this hobby if a) you have bags of money and b) you have an incredible amount of free time on your hands. Dont get me wrong, I would love to field a fully painted army, but beng at uni + having a job leaves barely enough time to play a game let alone paint 3000+pts of orks, even sticking the models together takes up alot of time. I can understand people have a distaste for the grey and silver horde, but i seriously doubt playing against an unpainted army is gonna ruin a game.

BobTheZombie
25-03-2008, 22:41
What I have a problem with is someone saying, for example, that their lone scarab painted gold is the Deceiver. It's all very well them saying "ah, but you see, the C'Tan are mighty, and the Deceiver is a master at the art of subterfuge, and he's gold, look!". Same with a rhino with no added armour and a few lascannons heaped on top being used as a Baneblade.

The modelling/painting doesn't bother me to a large degree, as I'm not exactly a master of either, but there has to be some parallel between the actual model and the unit it represents for me- counts as is fine if I can see it's similar to its rules. I hasten to add in a game among mates, whatever you want goes. There should be no trouble here or outside judgement, but a blank base used as the most expensive unit in the codex on a regular basis in pick-up games is wrong, I think. But I don't get worked up about much.

The aforementioned Wraith is a nice idea in it's own right, and has the bonus of saving money. I'd like to see a monolith rising from the depths with waves crashing off it. And a harpoon stuck to it.

boogaloo
25-03-2008, 22:44
i'd say if you have that much of a problem with it, politely ask that he remove that model first. I have done this and i allowed the guy to switch places with any model (as the owning player decides which casulaties to remove) so that he could maintain the formation that HE chose.

Anyways... that's what i recomend if it's a bother

Imperialis_Dominatus
25-03-2008, 22:46
The aforementioned Wraith is a nice idea in it's own right, and has the bonus of saving money. I'd like to see a monolith rising from the depths with waves crashing off it. And a harpoon stuck to it.

Paint it white too. The nemesis of Fourth Company Captain Ahab and his Chapter, the Leviathan Killers, and their journey across the galaxy on the Battle Barge Pequod. Ahab lost a leg to the Particle Whip (damn that Monolith and it's character sniping) and wants revenge! :D

Solasun
25-03-2008, 22:56
Paint it white too. The nemesis of Fourth Company Captain Ahab and his Chapter, the Leviathan Killers, and their journey across the galaxy on the Battle Barge Pequod. Ahab lost a leg to the Particle Whip (damn that Monolith and it's character sniping) and wants revenge! :D

Damn you! Now I need three more Monoliths to finish every conversion idea! It even makes sense to have a raised fist screaming marine for once!

Freakiq
25-03-2008, 23:03
Amazingly irrelevant of the topic.

Guys. We are gamers, we are NERDS.
Everybody looks down on us, everybody. (Ok, maybe weīre better than emos ...)

Now, who of you geeks relly is that desperate and not aware of his geekyness, that he has to establish a pecking order? Just to have someone to look down to?

My-homemade-optimups-prime-suit-is-better-than-yours!
My-legolas-costume-is-better-than-yours-because-you-have-one-button-too-few!
Your-vulcan-ears-look-more-artifical-than-mine!

Your-army-is-sub-standard! My-painted-little-men-are-not-going-to-fight-yours!

I'm not trying to establish a pecking order I'm just saying using an unpainted army that is not WIP is similar to showing up to a LARP without a costume.

I couldn't care less about the rules or who wins, I just want to see a spectacular battle where I'm the general. If you don't care about such things then find someone likeminded and use stones and pieces of paper instead of figures.

Cornelius
25-03-2008, 23:21
Eulenspiegel. Wonderful post. But we all have our hierarchies, us geeks included:

http://www.brunching.com/images/geekchartbig.gif

http://lukewelling.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/programmer%20hierarchy.gif

Moriarty
25-03-2008, 23:21
You wouldn't bin the remains of an IG HW box when you'd made up the three bases, would you?

Imperialis_Dominatus
25-03-2008, 23:28
Damn you! Now I need three more Monoliths to finish every conversion idea! It even makes sense to have a raised fist screaming marine for once!

Don't worry, I'm having to restrain myself from another writing project myself.

EDIT: Cornelius... where are wargamers on that chart? :( Do we not count?

intellectawe
25-03-2008, 23:37
Snobhammer..... nice.

The Orange
26-03-2008, 00:24
use stones and pieces of paper instead of figures.

Since when did heavily converted models become sticks and stones? (or even a part of this topic) It's these kinds of assumptions by ******s that I hate to see. Despite how poor an army might look, people do spend time and money on them, but by your standards they might as well be using sticks and stones, right? Any and all effort they might have put in ain't worth a darn because it's not pretty :rolleyes:.

Freakiq
26-03-2008, 00:43
Since when did heavily converted models become sticks and stones? (or even a part of this topic) It's these kinds of assumptions by ******s that I hate to see. Despite how poor an army might look, people do spend time and money on them, but by your standards they might as well be using sticks and stones, right? Any and all effort they might have put in ain't worth a darn because it's not pretty :rolleyes:.

I have no problem with poorly painted and converted models, as long as I can see what they're supposed to be and are painted with at least a basecoat colour I gladly play against them.

The only thing I don't like are armies composed of unpainted miniatures and questionable proxy's.

I would never deny someone to play against me because I didn't like his paint scheme or because he's not as skilled at painting as me.

You post is also reported due to flaming (the ****** bit). :)

Captain Micha
26-03-2008, 00:44
hmph originally my crons were from a mars like world..... now I might change that..... aquatic necrons for the win.

nightgant98c
26-03-2008, 02:03
I'll agree with those who said the intent should be considered. As long as he was just trying to make his money stretch a bit, and he put some effort into making them look nice, then I think it's fine. If there was some intent to gain an advantage from the smaller models, then that's bad.

Burning Star IV
26-03-2008, 04:48
It's like saying: "I find everything written in a post by Burning Star IV to be juvenile snobbishness, but it has no bearing whatsoever on the poster, just his comments." Things don't work that way.

yeah....I think you're on to something here,but......


Just like I wouldn't watch Lord Of The Rings if the monsters were only guys with signs saying "cool monster" I wouldn't play against an unpainted army.

Ah! Good analogy.

See Cornelius, if you make your analogies fit, they might have a little more relevance. But alas..... well but hey you tried, so just to prove I don't always shun rubbish (provided it has real effort behind it,) your post gets a B+. Grats!

Kalec
26-03-2008, 04:55
As long as the models fit the legal requirements, and the counts-as are consistent, I don't care if my opponent is calling his guardsmen Chosen, or using legos as grots.

As for the stealth suit represented by the footprint, put a toothpick on the base with something to indicate the face (for drawing LOS) and the weapon equipped, and to make it clear how tall the model is. A toothpick with a sticky note on it would work perfectly, and cheaply.

Imperialis_Dominatus
26-03-2008, 04:58
yeah....I think you're on to something here,but......



Ah! Good analogy.

See Cornelius, if you make your analogies fit, they might have a little more relevance. But alas..... well but hey you tried, so just to prove I don't always shun rubbish (provided it has real effort behind it,) your post gets a B+. Grats!

Actually, I think Freakiq's post is even less accurate. At least Cornelius referenced an exchange of some sort, and in this case, as a debate, it resembles a contest like 40k is. Freakiq's example references a work of display more than anything else; and if you apply this to 40k then it would seem you expect other people's armies to be some sort of show for your enjoyment. Kind of gratuitous if you ask me.

And if you think those little details aren't relevant, then the analogies are essentially the same. One just puts your position in a light that you probably don't find favorable.

Calling his post rubbish :eyebrows:, therefore, was somewhat undeserved. And he's still right. Why would a comment about a poster's snobbishness have no bearing on the poster themselves? Answer is that it would. Why wouldn't someone go to a movie if the monsters were obvious proxies? Because the film makers did a **** job. Now, why wouldn't that action (shunning a movie because it was crap) be a comment on the personality and ethics of the film makers themselves? Answer, again, is that it obviously would. So both analogies basically put the hypothetical actors in them in the same light.

And your grading system, in light of the above, strikes me as biased. Ergo, I shall not attend your.... class. Refrain, please, from giving my own posts such an ill judgement.

Burning Star IV
26-03-2008, 06:44
Actually, I think Freakiq's post is even less accurate. At least Cornelius referenced an exchange of some sort, and in this case, as a debate, it resembles a contest like 40k is. Freakiq's example references a work of display more than anything else; and if you apply this to 40k then it would seem you expect other people's armies to be some sort of show for your enjoyment. Kind of gratuitous if you ask me.

And if you think those little details aren't relevant, then the analogies are essentially the same. One just puts your position in a light that you probably don't find favorable.

Calling his post rubbish :eyebrows:, therefore, was somewhat undeserved. And he's still right. Why would a comment about a poster's snobbishness have no bearing on the poster themselves? Answer is that it would. Why wouldn't someone go to a movie if the monsters were obvious proxies? Because the film makers did a **** job. Now, why wouldn't that action (shunning a movie because it was crap) be a comment on the personality and ethics of the film makers themselves? Answer, again, is that it obviously would. So both analogies basically put the hypothetical actors in them in the same light.

And your grading system, in light of the above, strikes me as biased. Ergo, I shall not attend your.... class. Refrain, please, from giving my own posts such an ill judgement.

I won't give it such ill judgement, because, despite the prevailing belief here, I'm pretty objective.

A show for my enjoyment? Thats quite a spin you put on it, but isn't the general consensus that the most important thing is for both players to have fun? So if I'm being deprived of this fun, why should I play? I'm not getting any extra credit hours for 40k night, so when there's no fun in it, I may as well just not play the game.

I thought Freakiq's post was more valid not because it sided with my point, but because it was related to aesthetics rather than cornelius' example, which was related solely to character.

Logarithm Udgaur
26-03-2008, 10:17
Just like I wouldn't watch Lord Of The Rings if the monsters were only guys with signs saying "cool monster" I wouldn't play against an unpainted army.

I'm into this game because I want to command my cool looking army against my mates cool looking army on a cool looking table.

Seeing my grey plastic men beat his plastic men on a kitchen table wouldn't spark the same feeling of two armies fighting.

If I'm not going to enjoy myself then why waste my time?

I had have enough reading for awhile so thought I would stick in a reply. It is funny that you use LOTR movies as an example, because the reason I did not care for them is they where style over substance. Sure it looked cool, but it was a lame story (the Peter Jackson version) wrapped in millions of dollars in special effects.
While I would appreciate a good looking, fully painted army, I would much rather play an army that looked good over an army that was fully (badly) painted. I have seen some really crap looking armies over the years, that where fully painted. If I feel pressured to only play stuff that is painted, my painting standard tends to go down real quick. To the point of base coating my gals/guys black, white, and gray to comply with the three colors rule.

If someone refuses to play me, fine that is their choice, but if they are playing the game just for the look, why play at all. Their are much prettier games played nearly ever month in White Dwarf.
I hope no one takes this as personal, as I am merely commenting on their post, and not them as a person.

Logarithm Udgaur
26-03-2008, 10:26
yeah....I think you're on to something here,but......



Ah! Good analogy.

See Cornelius, if you make your analogies fit, they might have a little more relevance. But alas..... well but hey you tried, so just to prove I don't always shun rubbish (provided it has real effort behind it,) your post gets a B+. Grats!

So basically a good analogy is one you agree with and a bad analogy is one that make you look bad. I may have to rethink the English language.

Hasan ibn Sabbah
26-03-2008, 10:50
I would play even against all-proxy army made from cardboard circles (it would be hypocrisy if I wouldn't since my first 2 years in this hobby I had something like this witch was gradually, month after month replaced by minis). For me warhammer is game and hobby, I paint minis because I enjoy it and I play because I like challenge witch good game is.

Even If I'm not sharing point of view with Burning Star IV, I understand him. I would say that everybody have different Idea of this hobby. One play for tactical challenge, another play to make epic battle on beautiful board with two beautiful armies and other play for both reasons. There are even people that are not playing, and only paint and model minis (since I'm on quite heavy studies, it's for me mostly). For me it's more like with GO, I would have no problems with playing it with dark and white stones and lines on the sand, but someone would like to play on board placed on lack table, and play with pawns made out of clam shells. You can't argue with other vision of you're hobby because there's no way that any of arguing sides will ever win this. What for you sound snobbish, for another is essence of hobby (expensive hobby that takes lot's of money and time).

P.S. I love Idea of Naval Necros, and Wraith conversion (I would just add a poor guardsmen, painted on some marine colors, struggling with Wraith's tail :) consider Idea stolen and inducted into my brother's army)

Cornelius
26-03-2008, 11:13
EDIT: Cornelius... where are wargamers on that chart? :( Do we not count?

Sure we do. I think most of us are between the LARP folk and the 13 year old gamers of any sort, with the 13 year old 40k gamers slightly below us. Then again, some people act like this was a forum for furries - when you put style over substance ;)

Imperialis_Dominatus
26-03-2008, 11:42
I thought Freakiq's post was more valid not because it sided with my point, but because it was related to aesthetics rather than cornelius' example, which was related solely to character.

Well, to be honest, Cornelius' analogy wasn't quite discussing the same thing. He was more miffed that you were under the belief that your decision to not play someone was based on a character judgement, which, whether you mean it to be or whether you're tactful about it or not, it is a judgement of that person's character. That is, I believe, the point he was discussing. Whereas Freakiq's analogy attempted to skirt that a bit but, as you'll see in my post, it still boils down to a judgement of character.

Bottom line: my side of the debate feels that if you judge the aesthetics of an army, you are, in fact, judging its owner. They didn't put enough time in it for you, they aren't as dedicated as you, ergo you won't play them. Personally I feel this is wrong, but whether or not it is wrong, it's still there. It is a character judgement, fancy analogies aside.

Freakiq
26-03-2008, 11:50
Well, to be honest, Cornelius' analogy wasn't quite discussing the same thing. He was more miffed that you were under the belief that your decision to not play someone was based on a character judgement, which, whether you mean it to be or whether you're tactful about it or not, it is a judgement of that person's character. That is, I believe, the point he was discussing. Whereas Freakiq's analogy attempted to skirt that a bit but, as you'll see in my post, it still boils down to a judgement of character.

Bottom line: my side of the debate feels that if you judge the aesthetics of an army, you are, in fact, judging its owner. They didn't put enough time in it for you, they aren't as dedicated as you, ergo you won't play them. Personally I feel this is wrong, but whether or not it is wrong, it's still there. It is a character judgement, fancy analogies aside.

I don't care if they spent 3 years or 10 minutes on their army, as long as it's painted.

If they can't be bothered to take two hours to paint some units why should I be bothered to play a game?

Moostikal The Confused
26-03-2008, 12:03
I don't care if they spent 3 years or 10 minutes on their army, as long as it's painted.

If they can't be bothered to take two hours to paint some units why should I be bothered to play a game?

Why indeed? Why should anyone paint an army if they don't feel that they could do the model justice? Why should anyone play a game with you if your going to look down your nose at them because they don't feel the need to paint there models/can't paint there models? Why should someone do something that in there mind would destroy there model?

Personally i won't use an army thats not 99% painted but thats my choice. i won't push my views on anyone and think its appalling that someone would.

What i'm asking here is, why should anyone who doesn't want to paint there models do so to satisfy you?

Freakiq
26-03-2008, 12:10
Why indeed? Why should anyone paint an army if they don't feel that they could do the model justice? Why should anyone play a game with you if your going to look down your nose at them because they don't feel the need to paint there models/can't paint there models? Why should someone do something that in there mind would destroy there model?

Personally i won't use an army thats not 99% painted but thats my choice. i won't push my views on anyone and think its appalling that someone would.

What i'm asking here is, why should anyone who doesn't want to paint there models do so to satisfy you?

I'm not forcing anyone, but if they want to play against me they'll have to have a painted army. Seems from your post you think playing against me is a human right.

Are you going to force me to play against an unpainted army? :wtf:

Imperialis_Dominatus
26-03-2008, 12:24
Why indeed? Why should anyone paint an army if they don't feel that they could do the model justice? Why should anyone play a game with you if your going to look down your nose at them because they don't feel the need to paint there models/can't paint there models? Why should someone do something that in there mind would destroy there model?

Had the same sentiment before. I'm scared to paint because, though my models look awesome as far as modeling goes... check out my painting log to see how I ruin them. Well, kinda. People give me all this 'you're alright, a lot better than you make yourself out to be, blah blah,' buy you know it's all lies. ;)

Freakiq
26-03-2008, 12:35
Had the same sentiment before. I'm scared to paint because, though my models look awesome as far as modeling goes... check out my painting log to see how I ruin them. Well, kinda. People give me all this 'you're alright, a lot better than you make yourself out to be, blah blah,' buy you know it's all lies. ;)

I would have no problem playing against your army.
I think an army painted liker that would look vastly better than an unpainted one

I would never look down on someone because of their painting skills, though I'd love to share some painting tips after the game.

If you want to you could thin down black ink 1:3 to water and wash over your models to give some shading. Or if you have the time just paint it into the recesses on the model.

EDIT: I now realize the black ink thing had already been said in your painting log and I now look like a jackass. :o

Moostikal The Confused
26-03-2008, 12:43
I'm not forcing anyone, but if they want to play against me they'll have to have a painted army. Seems from your post you think playing against me is a human right.

Are you going to force me to play against an unpainted army? :wtf:

Of course not that would be me pushing my views on you. try to read the whole post. Its your choice to play the game or not. Excluding someone from a game because of unpainted models is a bit, harsh.

As for having time to paint there models some people have this thing happen to them called "real life". Sometimes it involves looking after little people that are not made of plastic/white metal. Sometimes it can involve doing work for and towards 'education' and sometimes it involves a thing called 'work', which, for those of an 'employable age', is what provides for their hobby.

Condecending i know but your attitude has annoyed me.


Oh, to go along with 4th company Captian Ahab, don't forget Assault Sgt Queequeg, or Vet Sgt Ishmael!

Adra
26-03-2008, 12:50
Sure we do. I think most of us are between the LARP folk and the 13 year old gamers of any sort, with the 13 year old 40k gamers slightly below us. Then again, some people act like this was a forum for furries - when you put style over substance ;)

sorry but no...no no no...over the years of feeling an utter geek with this hobby and having to explain it to gf's and friends i have always ALWAYS been conforted by the fact that LARPers are way more geeky than me. i do not mince about a field ok. LARP is both geeky and camp so no we fit just above them thanks very much.

Freakiq
26-03-2008, 12:54
Of course not that would be me pushing my views on you. try to read the whole post. Its your choice to play the game or not. Excluding someone from a game because of unpainted models is a bit, harsh.

As for having time to paint there models some people have this thing happen to them called "real life". Sometimes it involves looking after little people that are not made of plastic/white metal. Sometimes it can involve doing work for and towards 'education' and sometimes it involves a thing called 'work', which, for those of an 'employable age', is what provides for their hobby.

Condecending i know but your attitude has annoyed me.


Oh, to go along with 4th company Captian Ahab, don't forget Assault Sgt Queequeg, or Vet Sgt Ishmael!


The people who do not want to paint have many likeminded opponents with unpainted armies to play against, but if they want to play against us guys with painted armies they will have to paint.

I know it may sound harsh to you but this has helped many players in my area to aspire to have a painted army that they have even taken to tournaments and got good gaming and painting scores as well as showing that there is more to the hobby than just list building and gaming.


I too have work and education to think about but between games at my gaming club I tend to paint rather than just stand around.

Imperialis_Dominatus
26-03-2008, 13:03
The people who do not want to paint have many likeminded opponents with unpainted armies to play against, but if they want to play against us guys with painted armies they will have to paint.

Who's to say they don't want to paint? Maybe they just don't have time.

I'm not anymore attacking your position on refusing a game, just so you know. I'm just clarifying things here.


I know it may sound harsh to you but this has helped many players in my area to aspire to have a painted army that they have even taken to tournaments and got good gaming and painting scores as well as showing that there is more to the hobby than just list building and gaming.

Ends justify the means much? One could just as easily argue that there's more to 'the hobby' than painting or building. I like background myself.


I too have work and education to think about but between games at my gaming club I tend to paint rather than just stand around.

So you're typecasting people around the world (not just your area) as not only not doing what you do, but doing what you say they do, that is, stand around?

Besides, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with standing around. While standing around one could banter about the hobby, the game they just played, how ridiculous x Codex is and how y Codex needs a boost, fluff, etc.

Granted you could do that while painting, but not everyone's a fantastic multi-tasker.

rodmillard
26-03-2008, 13:09
sorry but no...no no no...over the years of feeling an utter geek with this hobby and having to explain it to gf's and friends i have always ALWAYS been conforted by the fact that LARPers are way more geeky than me. i do not mince about a field ok. LARP is both geeky and camp so no we fit just above them thanks very much.

Thankyou very much. It is possible to do both LARP and wargames, you know. Incidentally, warhammer is looked down upon by a large number of Larpers ("why move little men around the board when you can do it for real and get some exercise in daylight..."). Personally, I would put LARP and wargames on a par, but both looking down on each other rather like the Ren Fair <-> SCA relationship on the left of the chart.

Freakiq
26-03-2008, 13:15
Who's to say they don't want to paint? Maybe they just don't have time.

I'm not anymore attacking your position on refusing a game, just so you know. I'm just clarifying things here.



Ends justify the means much? One could just as easily argue that there's more to 'the hobby' than painting or building. I like background myself.



So you're typecasting people around the world (not just your area) as not only not doing what you do, but doing what you say they do, that is, stand around?

Besides, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with standing around. While standing around one could banter about the hobby, the game they just played, how ridiculous x Codex is and how y Codex needs a boost, fluff, etc.

Granted you could do that while painting, but not everyone's a fantastic multi-tasker.

I'm not complaining that they stand around I do that too sometimes, but when they say they haven't got time to paint after spending several hours of standing around and inspecting other's models I find it's more just laziness than lack of time.

But since they have other people to play against it's not a problem.

I'm not forcing anyone to do anything I just want to play a fun game of warhammer against a player with a painted army and since most of us have painted armies it's not a problem.

Necromancer2
26-03-2008, 13:16
We are all dorks for being here.. gosh!! lol

back on topic... I think the modeling job is cheap... but in terms of casual gaming I'd say it perfectly fine.

Moostikal The Confused
26-03-2008, 13:19
Who's to say they don't want to paint? Maybe they just don't have time.Nail on the head.


I'm not anymore attacking your position on refusing a game, just so you know. I'm just clarifying things here..SNAP!




Granted you could do that while painting, but not everyone's a fantastic multi-tasker.
Speaking of multi tasking and painting, i have some tau to violently attack with paint so i must take my leave. Also, i'd suggest that you avoid the white with the black ink, you've got it looking good and i'm sure you don't wanna scum it up with the ink. try lining in with an architects pen. I used to nick then from my dad from time to time. if you can, get rotring(sp?) pens there very good, very fine point on them.

Burning Star IV
26-03-2008, 14:22
Sorry to place the burden on you, freakiq, to be the last bastion of reason here, but I'm done. Either I am inadequately conveying my point, or the majority of this thread refuses/ is unable to understand it. For me it isn't worth it to type the same point repeatedly to people who aren't getting it anyway.

I've gotta go so I can paint my friend's army...yep, so it'll look good enough to be fielded against mine. Ciao!

ehlijen
26-03-2008, 14:36
I for one would like to thank everyone who could be called 'up themselves'. Without them I couldn't be up myself about not being up myself (this is infinitely recursable btw).

In other words: stick to people you get along with and avoid those you don't. It's just easier in the end.

The only reason geeks are still looked down on by the so called mainstream, is because we aren't united and look down on each other as well. I feel like calling for a revolution right now, but I gotta go paint some plastic toy soldiers, cia!

noodle-j
26-03-2008, 17:47
firstly wats a LARP? sorry i'm not very good with the abbreviations etc.
i dont think painting should matter in a game. im a crap painter and i'd be incredibly discouraged if i was denied a game because not only my painting skills are shoddy, but my gaming skills will be seen likewise....and whats this about everyone is a nerd / dork for liking warhammer instead of doing what everyone else wants you to do...most of the time people call others nerds coz theyre scared to go anywhere near the kind of things that make them a "nerd" *slaps the general public* GROW SOME! :p

Makiaveli
26-03-2008, 18:12
And drop it with the insinuations about us being unable to enjoy doing stuff with people unless it meets our exact preferences. That's a load of rubbish

I will admit up front that I only read as far as this post. And not trying to flame in any way. I just want to ask a question as I don't get your point.

If you aren't saying you won't enjoy a game due to the unacceptable models, then why won't you play? The only option I see is that you are trying to force that player to come up to your acceptable standards or leave the game. Not a flame again, just asking what else is there?

EDIT: to Noodle-j I think you have a good attitude :) As to LARP it is Live Action Role-Playing. You dress up in character and then act out the game instead of sitting around a table. Also, we can call ourselves geeks/nerds etc since it's all in the family. Trust me you have to be a better painter than me, haven't touched a brush in 15 years. My army will be a nightmare. But to all the people who say I don't want to paint because it will be ugly, 2 things. One that's a cop out since you will never get better if you don't practice. So seek out help online and off. Next, Simple Green works wonders on taking off paint. Non-toxic and let it soak overnight and then just take an old toothbrush and clean them off. Now paint that ugly model again and hope it's better this time.

The Orange
26-03-2008, 18:19
when they say they haven't got time to paint after spending several hours of standing around and inspecting other's models I find it's more just laziness than lack of time.
That judging a person more from experience, rather then on their army alone, and I don't have a problem with that. But judging someone solely on their army alone is IMO unfair discrimination, which is the whole point of this thread.


firstly wats a LARP?
I'm thinking Live Action Role Play.

As for excuses for not painting, one of my mates had to give up painting because he gets so much crap from his parents about it being a waste of time. Granted his parents are crazy. He's a 20+ something college student, how much crap does it take to convince an adult to stop something? (note he tends to be quite insubordinate) Quite a bit, IMO. (interesting to note that his mom collects princess Dianna dolls :rolleyes:)

In fact all of my friends are in that same boat , as they all have armies that are filled with unpainted models, and/or proxies. I am the only one that regularly fields a fully painted army, and you can imagine how boring this hobby would be if I took the attitude of only playing against painted armies to heart. Despite having poorly painted armies, and poor terrain, etc. we still deeply enjoy the hobby because it's a social activity that makes it fun (talking about painting, playing against each other, discussing fluff, etc.), not any one facet.

And I'd like to further note how having such a standard was an utter failure for GW stores, at least in my area. They used to demand a 3 paint minimum, as well as models be based (sand glued on, etc). So no one would play at the stores, thus no community was ever built up. When the changed that, guess what? People played at the stores more. They could come in buy a mini and start assembling it right there, start using them in games, and even start painting them in the store. No need to run right home and wait until said model was actually completely done to start enjoying the purchase (which would probably be at least a week later, if not months later). And when you get big crowds of people playing in the store, it magically seems to attract more potential customers for the store, despite poor looking armies being fielded. Thus building up the community even further.

Adept
26-03-2008, 18:40
What i'm asking here is, why should anyone who doesn't want to paint there models do so to satisfy you?

No reason they should.

Why should I take the time to play them when I would enjoy the game more playing someone with a painted army?

Moostikal The Confused
26-03-2008, 19:10
No reason they should.

Why should I take the time to play them when I would enjoy the game more playing someone with a painted army?

I'm not sayin you should. I too enjoy the game more when its a nicely painted army that my berzerkers are steamrollerin. It looks so much better when my orks get stamped flat by a green an white eldar force.

But its just as fun when a plastic coloured nid army eat my traitor guard. When white metal stormies get shot to bits by my defiler i still think its cool.

these people with unpainted armies can still play the game. I'm not sayin they should get to against you if you don't want them to but to cast judgement on them because there models lack paint is unfair of you. What i am sayin, and what i have said is that some people don't want to paint cos they don't think they can.

You know what? ******* it this is a pointless and off-topic argument. You want to play the game when it looks the best, i wanna play the game. Excluding someone for not having a painted army is rude.

Shadowheart
26-03-2008, 19:22
I will admit up front that I only read as far as this post. And not trying to flame in any way. I just want to ask a question as I don't get your point.

If you aren't saying you won't enjoy a game due to the unacceptable models, then why won't you play? The only option I see is that you are trying to force that player to come up to your acceptable standards or leave the game. Not a flame again, just asking what else is there?

I'll never understand the burning desire of understanding everyone's motivations... maybe that's why I've got time to paint.

Anyway, I'm just not that much of a hedonist, I guess, and I have more conciderations than "what will give me pleasure". No crab claws for me. For one thing, I'm fairly vain and prefer looking good in public, which, yes, extends to the miniature armies I might be caught dead with.

That said, there is the thing that while I might enjoy a game against anyone, I'd probably enjoy it more if it were against someone with the same interests and aims. I guess I'm picky as well.

I'm definitely not trying to force that player to leave the game, because he isn't a player and there is no game. Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Also, again, people insist on getting things the wrong way around. It's not "If you want to play me, you have to meet these standards", it's "If you don't meet these standards, I don't want to play you".


Excluding someone for not having a painted army is rude.

So, what, people can just barge in and lay claim to someone else's time, and if the other person tells them no, it's them being rude? If you're trying to make someone do something they don't want to either way it makes you a jerk. If you were polite and conciderate in the first place there'd be no need to exclude you, you'd take the hint and find someone who does want to play with you instead of bothering someone that doesn't.

Nephilim of Sin
26-03-2008, 19:23
I think that it is funny that one of the original arguments on this subject was concerning LOS. There was the argument that it might even be construed as cheating if everything was not to scale. That made me wonder then, would someone have a problem playing against an opponent who had a squad kneeling/crawling? Hey, it would look great on the tabletop, but then it wouldn't give an accurate account of LOS. What if they decided to do 'true scale Space Marines'? Would that not confer an advantage (and yes, disadvantage in certain situations, but still). In fact, with any conversion, you are going to run into this problem in some way.

If this guy was clever enough (yes, clever) to come up with a way that gets him more models for his money, that fit his theme, then all power to him. It is not like he cut a landspeeder in half and said his models were a 'cross-section view' or anything to double his models. Not everyone can afford to make their army look spectacular to someone else. If you don't like it, you don't have to play against it. However, complaining that you are 'wasting' two hours of your life to play a game is somehow more justified than someone complaining they have to 'waste' hours upon hours of painting to satisfy someone else? That does not make any sense to me.

Chaplain of Chaos
26-03-2008, 20:38
I think when it comes down to it, people have their standards for modeling miniatures and for me to exlude someone becaue they don't have as much time to invest in painting or modeling is an extremely low standard of gaming etiquette.

I hold people to a high standard of etiquette on the gaming table. I expect people to be respectful at all times, work throug problems fairly and try to be pleasent. I feel that I give respect to my opponents at all times and genuinly try to make the game enjoyable for them as well as me. I make sacrifices to play the game. Thus I expect others to make sacrifices as well.

Excluding someone for not having a painted army is Poor Warhammer Etiquette.

ChaosBeast
26-03-2008, 21:21
the idea of "your models arent painted, your a bad person" is boll**ks

i have a friend whos entire army is unpainted because he only plays an army for 6 months before he sells it and buys a new one. he's a nice guy but due to people like Isambards 'standards' mean that he is a lazy, uncommitted person who just cant be bothered. people like that make me so ticked:mad:

Imperialis_Dominatus
26-03-2008, 21:34
Speaking of multi tasking and painting, i have some tau to violently attack with paint so i must take my leave. Also, i'd suggest that you avoid the white with the black ink, you've got it looking good and i'm sure you don't wanna scum it up with the ink. try lining in with an architects pen. I used to nick then from my dad from time to time. if you can, get rotring(sp?) pens there very good, very fine point on them.

Would have been more helpful in the painting thread, but I think you're right. Thanks.


Also, again, people insist on getting things the wrong way around. It's not "If you want to play me, you have to meet these standards", it's "If you don't meet these standards, I don't want to play you".

It's the same thing from different perspectives. I'm sick of this argument now, especially since I was nice and civil and Burning Star had the brass pair to say that Freakiq, since he left, is now the 'last remaining bastion of reason' here. :rolleyes: Belittling your opposition much?

Don't worry, Freakiq, I won't burden you. Forget about it, drop it, I'll even offer you a conciliatory handshake. Sorry for the whole damn conversation. I'm in complete earnest, let's just leave it.

Makiaveli
26-03-2008, 21:40
I'll never understand the burning desire of understanding everyone's motivations... maybe that's why I've got time to paint.

Anyway, I'm just not that much of a hedonist, I guess, and I have more conciderations than "what will give me pleasure". No crab claws for me. For one thing, I'm fairly vain and prefer looking good in public, which, yes, extends to the miniature armies I might be caught dead with.

That said, there is the thing that while I might enjoy a game against anyone, I'd probably enjoy it more if it were against someone with the same interests and aims. I guess I'm picky as well.

I'm definitely not trying to force that player to leave the game, because he isn't a player and there is no game. Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Also, again, people insist on getting things the wrong way around. It's not "If you want to play me, you have to meet these standards", it's "If you don't meet these standards, I don't want to play you".



So, what, people can just barge in and lay claim to someone else's time, and if the other person tells them no, it's them being rude? If you're trying to make someone do something they don't want to either way it makes you a jerk. If you were polite and conciderate in the first place there'd be no need to exclude you, you'd take the hint and find someone who does want to play with you instead of bothering someone that doesn't.

To the first part, not a hedonist, just a student of people. Also, hoping to maybe get some people to think.

On to the meat. Your "If you want"/"If you don't" comment seems to me to be two sides of the same coin. You will only play with people who meet your standards. Thats your call. At least you admit to being vain, and that's all good if it works for you. We all have our own ways of building up self esteem.

And to the leaving the game part, I didn't mean force them out of a specific game of 40K, I mean out of the hobby by discouraging them. Your comments sound to me like elitism based off of you judging yourself by the condition of your army amongst other things. Which is not abnormal or wrong. Not saying that. Which it's not your job to encourage them either. So your not breaking any cosmic law, just not a good practice as the more people in the game, the better on many levels.


As to the second part, how would I be kind and considerate enough to know you didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted unless I already asked you once before? If I ask and you say I prefer to play against people with fully painted armies, Okies. I will make a note in my mental rolodex and go ask someone else.

Chaplain of Chaos
27-03-2008, 00:51
"If you want to play me, you have to meet these standards" it's "If you don't meet these standards, I don't want to play you."

Ones from the perspective of the other player... the other is yours... that says nothing and in fact enforcers what I was saying before.

It really does seem that the two sides of this debate are just wired completely diffrently. It's unfortunate because I'm sure you're nice guys.

The bad part is that however nice you are, you and I will never be able to play a friendly game because you would think my models are too inferior to play against and thus a waste of your time.

Freakiq
27-03-2008, 01:10
"If you want to play me, you have to meet these standards" it's "If you don't meet these standards, I don't want to play you."

Ones from the perspective of the other player... the other is yours... that says nothing and in fact enforcers what I was saying before.

It really does seem that the two sides of this debate are just wired completely diffrently. It's unfortunate because I'm sure you're nice guys.

The bad part is that however nice you are, you and I will never be able to play a friendly game because you would think my models are too inferior to play against and thus a waste of your time.

If you are going to remove the beauty of the miniatures why not skip the background stories and the artwork? Then we would only have a small booklet of numbers and rules.

I'm not into this game because of the rules, I'm more interested in the miniatures, the artwork and stories.

If you want to play a game where there are undetailed markers instead of painted figures representing warriors I'd gladly play a game of chess with you.

And I ask you this: would you play a computer game where every character and item was boring grey without light effects or shadows?

Chaplain of Chaos
27-03-2008, 01:24
No I wouldn't play that game, but of course.. your example is terrible.

People are payed to do the work that makes those models pretty. Then I the consumer spend my money to get a fully completed game. Your analogy would work if we where talking about commision painted armies or something.

If I was payed to paint my models i'd do it immediatly! (And it's not that I don't paint it's just that I paint very slowly usually a model at a time.)

And it's definatly not that I don't value painted armied, I admire those who have the time and motivation to create beautiful works of art. When I play smaller games using only my painted models I feel very good seeing all those painted mini's marching to war. Yet my enjoyment of the game doesn't hinge completely on whether the models are painted or not. That was my only point that I was making, I can play the game even with unpainted models or against unpainted models and still have a good time.

Freakiq
27-03-2008, 01:36
No I wouldn't play that game, but of course.. your example is terrible.

People are payed to do the work that makes those models pretty. Then I the consumer spend my money to get a fully completed game. Your analogy would work if we where talking about commision painted armies or something.

If I was payed to paint my models i'd do it immediatly! (And it's not that I don't paint it's just that I paint very slowly usually a model at a time.)

And it's definatly not that I don't value painted armied, I admire those who have the time and motivation to create beautiful works of art. When I play smaller games using only my painted models I feel very good seeing all those painted mini's marching to war. Yet my enjoyment of the game doesn't hinge completely on whether the models are painted or not. That was my only point that I was making, I can play the game even with unpainted models or against unpainted models and still have a good time.

Then why not pay someone to paint up your army?

There are many comission painters out there, many of them are really cheap too.

Nephilim of Sin
27-03-2008, 01:47
....
And I ask you this: would you play a computer game where every character and item was boring grey without light effects or shadows?

No, but then I wouldn't buy the program to create the game, and then detail everything with code and such either. I am not a game programmer. I might try and make something interesting to test my skills, but I know my limitations. Instead, since I care that much about stuff like that, I buy a finished game.

Basing that on your own analogy, one might as well buy prepaints.

Chaplain of Chaos
27-03-2008, 01:51
I wouldn't pay someone to paint my army because I don't value the painted miniatures because they are painted I value them for the work I put into them (when I have the time). Also.. unlike some souls I don't even have the money to throw around to get my models commission painted so it's irrelevant.

Painted Models Aren't Important, Enjoyment of the game is important. I believe people can enjoy the game no matter the condition of the models if they want to.

Now I will say this, the aesthetic quality of the game rises when armies are fully painted. Yet aesthetics are only a single aspect that exists independently of the game itself.

Nephilim of Sin
27-03-2008, 02:03
.....
Now I will say this, the aesthetic quality of the game rises when armies are fully painted. Yet aesthetics are only a single aspect that exists independently of the game itself.

This is true. We buy these models mainly because we already like how they look. Those that don't convert. Since beauty is subjective, that is why we get some 'poorhammer' armies as well. Someone spoke about Tau on surfboards. I think that could look great. Plus, they distinguished them from the other Fire Warriors. Why do some people get upset because someone found a way to spend less money than they did to get similar results?

A lot of people talk about painting here and there. Well, some may not have dedicated painting stations. Someone's 'gameroom' may just be the miniatures case they house their army in. Some people truly do not have the time to paint (and to all those that can give x examples of y, that is awesome, but remember just because you can, that doesn't mean everyone can. Congrats though), and instead have the time to game.

Freakiq
27-03-2008, 02:09
What is the point of you guys arguments, to make me confess I'm a bad person because I dont play against an unpainted army?

Are you tying to demonize me just beacuse I and most of my gaming group prioritize a differebt aspect of the hobby?

Chaplain of Chaos
27-03-2008, 02:19
Nope, not really. Don't make this about you, it's not. In fact I totally missed the part where this debate ever became about you or Shadowheart or Burning for that matter other than that you took the opposing side of the debate.

It turned from a talk about whether or not poorhammer is acceptable to whether or not it is proper table top etiquette to turn down friendly games because you don't like the way the others guys army looks.

I think that while it is rude to turn down a game for no other reason than that you don't like unpainted models it's entirely up to the player who he plays with.

Take it personally if you want, but thats your decision and not what I was trying to do at all.

On an interesting side note, one can see a parrallel between this and the previous debate. You are insulted that some others think it's bad etiquette that your standards and aesthetic sensibilties prevent you from playing friendly games with "Poorhammer" armies.

Now perhaps you can envision how those people with "Poorhammer" armies could sometimes feel when a friendly game is denied them because you don't like the way their army looks.

The Orange
27-03-2008, 02:54
If you are going to remove the beauty of the miniatures why not skip the background stories and the artwork? Then we would only have a small booklet of numbers and rules.
Slippery slope fallacy FTW!


And I ask you this: would you play a computer game where every character and item was boring grey without light effects or shadows?
If it was fun, yes. Graphic don't make the game, not by a long shot. Chess is a rather delightful game if I do say so myself.

If pretty models is your hang up, well that's a pretty weird hang up if I do say so myself. Considering that the gaming aspect is pretty much a social activity, I much rather prioritize the social aspect over anything else.

Chaplain of Chaos
27-03-2008, 03:07
Slippery slope fallacy FTW!

It makes me feel good knowing my Logic Professor perhaps isn't a complete lunatic if I can find a referance to what i'm learning here on the internet. :p

Shadowheart
27-03-2008, 04:53
It's the same thing from different perspectives.

It's not. One is me not trying to make someone else do something, the other is. Your different perspective doesn't change what I'm actually doing. I'm minding my own business, which I don't think the pleasure of other gamers is part of. Apparently some of you think you're entitled to my time and attention, as that's the only way you could feel as if I were denying you something.

Suppose you ask a girl out and she says thanks, but no. Suppose you ask her why and she says she doesn't like your hair. Do you go ahead and accuse her of being a snob, trying to force you to get hair that suits her standards? Do you whine about how discouraging it is to be turned down, and blame her for making it hard for guys to get a date? Do you try to make her feel bad about herself, and get your friends behind you to heap scorn on her?

The Orange
27-03-2008, 05:23
Apparently some of you think you're entitled to my time and attention, as that's the only way you could feel as if I were denying you something.
All I'm saying is that you should give people a chance, instead of setting your self up for a self fulfilling prophecy.


Suppose you ask a girl out and she says thanks, but no. ....
Do you think societies biases are fair right now? That we should just be happy with the status quo? Would you be happy walking away if that girl said no because your Black/Hispanic/Asian? I don't mean to compare you to a racist or anything, but that sort of mind set is pretty close to discrimination, and thats why I have such a problem with that way of thinking. That why I keep saying, yea go ahead and deny people if you know it's going to be a lame game because that guys had the same models for 6 months, but don't treat every unpainted army you see like that. Don't brush off people because of one inconsequential aspect of the hobby.

v_ol_tron
27-03-2008, 05:33
"Poorhammer" is the only rational response. Why would anyone who believes in market theory and free-markets ever do anything but "Poorhammer". To not "Poorhammer" is simply irrational, and ALL market models are based on the idea of a rational decision maker. Therefore, I submit that to not "Poorhammer" is to hate Capitalism and Western Society.

Easy E ended this debate on page 3. Flawless victory. (well the initial debate anyway)



Excluding someone for not having a painted army is rude.

Absolutely right. Grow the **** up.


Iīm putting up a petiton so the word "poorhammer" is being fragged by some sort of bad-word filter.
I donīt want to see it spread, and I donīt want to say Iīve been there when it was invented ...

:mad::wtf:I've had it! I'm taking it back! im taking back porchhammer "cough!" I mean poorhammer!! Most of my conversions were done simply because I couldnt afford the actual models, and that's what made me a decent modeller in the end. As far as I'm concerned, poorhammer armies are amazing. If you can figure out how to stretch out your parts to get more bang for your buck and play bigger games you deserve a medal.

Field your poorhammer armies with pride!!

Imperialis_Dominatus
27-03-2008, 05:42
Then why not pay someone to paint up your army?

There are many comission painters out there, many of them are really cheap too.

Pay so I can live up to someone else's standards while sacrificing any effort on my part that makes the army mine save for the actual building of the models.

Bah.

Like I said earlier, your guys' arguments and analogies are flawed and don't fit. And that slippery slope bit.... whatever. Like I said, I'm done with this argument.

Ronin_eX
27-03-2008, 06:58
o_O

This argument continues?

*looks up at banner*

Riiiiiiight, Warseer. So... everybody, in your own words what are you all arguing about? Because I think the point has up and left at this juncture. Bottom line, some people play things differently, "poorhammer" is another stupid word we've managed to invent (pat on the back there I will abhor it like I do Mathhammer and all the others) and you shouldn't play with people you think are jack asses.

I will close out my comment with a Buddhist saying:

"On Judgemental People: People with opinions (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png) just go around bothering each other."

So goodnight, and good luck in your eternal struggle! ;)

Draconian77
27-03-2008, 08:14
This forum would be oh so very dull without raging debates like this to amuse me.

Im not going to give my opinions because the thread seems to have died but I will applaud everyone who participated in this "event."


Without further adieu; Applauds.

Shadowheart
27-03-2008, 08:38
Do you think societies biases are fair right now?
I'd say you've got the wrong end of the stick, but that ain't a stick, that's a seabass. You're going to have to explain what the hell racism has to do with any of this, or why, if it doesn't have anything to do with it, you're mentioning it anyway.

I didn't mention society, I didn't mention race. I was talking about a girl who turned you down, alledgedly, because of your hair. Or whatever random reason that she might've had that seems silly to you. It kinda looks like you think everything you don't agree with is wrong. Apparently, you think I'm some lesser form or racist because we don't agree on the importance of paint on miniature armies.

You and Chaplain of Chaos have both stated that the look of an army is an unimportant part of the game. As if that's a fact. But it's a matter of interpretation. What's important to you isn't necessarily important to everyone else.

Ronin_eX, what I'm arguing for is that I should be free to chose to play or not play who I want, for whatever reasons, without having to state, explain, justify and defend my reasons, and without having to put up with insults and accusations.
Mostly that consists of trying to counter a bunch of spiteful nonsense until people pretend to be tired and leave.

Adept
27-03-2008, 09:11
Riiiiiiight, Warseer. So... everybody, in your own words what are you all arguing about?

I don't enjoy playing against bad counts as armies, or proxied units, or unpainted units. I don't like people using coke cans as dreadnoughts, or paint pots as terminators, or pieces of paper with 'landraider' written on it.

These things make the game less enjoyable for me than playing against people who have put in the extra time and effort to make some spectacular looking models.

And I want to be able to enjoy myself by being able to choose who I play against, without people telling me I am bigoted, rude, or that I should grow the **** up.

The Orange
27-03-2008, 09:17
You're going to have to explain what the hell racism has to do with any of this
You mentioned a girl turning down a boy because of his hair. That IMO is a pretty shallow/lousy way to judge people. But it happens, thus I asked do you think that a good norm for society to have?

I mentioned racism where people are discriminated against, again for pretty shallow/lousy reason.

Judging weather a person is worth playing solely on the look of their army is, IMO a pretty lousy/shallow way to judge a gamer, or if your will have fun playing against them.

I'm not calling you a racist, I even said outright that I'm not trying to call you a racist. But that line of thinking has parallels that maybe you should think about.

Yes you have the freedom to play who you want, for what ever reason you want. That girl can make whatever choice she wants, as can a racist. Their's just a reputation that you'll get for those kind of choices, and as I said (many times) before "How much of a snob do you want to look like" because thats probably the reputation you'll foster if you turn people down on the bases of their armies looks alone. I'm just stating what's likely going to happen, it has nothing to do with me firing up the community to hate players like you. If you constantly turn down players, yea they might get the idea that they should get going with their painting, but they probably won't hold you in high regard either.


I don't enjoy playing against bad counts as armies, or proxied units, or unpainted units. I don't like people using coke cans as dreadnoughts, or paint pots as terminators, or pieces of paper with 'landraider' written on it.
If you go back to the OT, you'll notice that the topic was never really about proxies in the first place, just conversions that hint of someone trying to save cash. It was your side that starting comparing those conversions to coke bottle drop pods, etc. and that kind of comparison is rather rude.

Nephilim of Sin
27-03-2008, 09:59
First off, if you do not wish to play against converted, proxy, or unpainted armies, then that is your right, obviously. Does that make you a bad person? No. Does that make you a snob? Well, to some people, yes, it does. When you set a standard above what many consider to be the norm, then it should be expected that there will be ridicule for said standard. Personally, I am a movie snob. It baffles me when people say things like "Epic Movie" or "The Hills Have Eyes" were great and worth buying.... :rolleyes: I admit I am a snob in that regard. Do I expect to catch flack from these people? No, of course not. However, I should understand that for some deluded reason (:evilgrin:), they enjoy these movies.

That is a fair comparison. Not crappy video games, nor is courtship. We could throw in the fact that Tolkien's writing stagnated in the second book, or that Robert Jordan could have cut out all of the "so-and-so of x house met so-and-so of y house with z confused Aes Sedai" crap and finished the series before he sadly passed. Those are all our opinions, which differ, and in each way make us snobs in some regard.

However, to the non-conversion (OP topic) crowd, and the 'must be painted' crowd, I have one question: If you are more focused on the hobby aspect, then why game? Obviously you enjoy both, and you are entitled to your opinion, but it does not seem like it is the game you are focusing on, but the fact of moving painted miniatures around some beautiful terrain. Although the two can be combined, they really are separate entities, and it is a personal question I am asking, not an attack on someone's standards.

lanrak
27-03-2008, 10:11
Hi all.
I often wonder why so many people are fixated on asthetics.
If some one has built an army to play 40k/WH to thier level of competence/ability.(This ranges from just assembled to GD standard minis.)
And have used thier budgets to the best of thier ability.(Conversions are ok, proxies by thier nature should be tempory,IMO.)

Whats the problem.
GW instills eliteism through its current propaganda,ONLY GW minis, assembled using GW glue, painted with GW paint , GW varnish and GW hobby suplies, WSYWIG, if it isnt GW and GD standard it is inferior...etc.
Yeah by all means show us the best, but atleast show normal gamers armies for a touchstone of reality.(On occasion, like The Tale of four gamers, odd BRs with normal gamers actual armies.)

Perhaps this focus on the minis and models is just to detract us gamers from the poor 40k/WH rule sets.

No other game system seems to fixate on the 'asthetic quality of the counters' to detract from the abismal game play quite as much as 40k.IMO.
Yes I said it , all the minis are is delux counters.
They dont actualy move or shoot,we imagine they do!
If we can imagine the little plastic men are representing a fully sentient trained fighting creature, surley we can imagine the level of detail , paint jobs are better than they are?

Having fully detailed terrain and nicley painted minis just adds to the asthetic appeal of a game.
It isnt a substitite for a intuative well defined rules set.:evilgrin:

Shadowheart
27-03-2008, 10:24
You mentioned a girl turning down a boy because of his hair.
No... I asked you what if a girl turned you down and said it was because of your hair. Hypothetical situation for the sake of argument. Should I take it your response would be to go online and complain about society and how other people are shallow snobs?

And again, the point of the analogy isn't the hair. It could be she says she doesn't want to go out with you because you're studying Spanish, or because you prefer Meaning of Life over Holy Grail. Any reason, so long as it's one you don't understand.

What I'm driving at is that instead of taking no for an answer and accepting that someone you wanted to do something with doesn't want to do it with you for reasons of their own, you tell yourself (and possibly them and other people besides) that they're wrong, that your values and reasoning is superior to theirs and that they should have said yes.


I'm not calling you a racist, I even said outright that I'm not trying to call you a racist. But that line of thinking has parallels that maybe you should think about.

Then don't bring it up. Don't use a term like that in relation to someone if it doesn't actually apply. I'd use expletives in that line, but they'd just get bleeped out.

As for your parallels, that's the stupidest argument put forth so far in this thread, which is saying something. It's like suggesting musicians are similar to racists because they don't want to play with someone who has no instrument or sense of rhythm, but who might have a wonderful personality and a deep love for rock and roll.

You're just turning the question of whether or not I want to play a game with someone into a question of whether or not I think they're worthy human beings. That's a load of ********. I respect the hell out of Stephen Hawking, but I ain't playing squash with him.


I'm just stating what's likely going to happen, it has nothing to do with me firing up the community to hate players like you.

Aren't we just the luckiest bunch to have such wise gurus like yourself to share their observations with us, and free of charge as well!

Moostikal The Confused
27-03-2008, 11:11
:mad::wtf:I've had it! I'm taking it back! im taking back porchhammer

PORCHHAMMER!? Would that be a term used to discribe lazy gamers who sit on there ass and stare at there models?

On topic, poorhammering kicks ass. 6 lumps of slate cost less than 6 stealth suits, for me the slate is free i just wait for bad weather then pick slates off the ground. Poorhammer=more booze.

Anyway, a question to the people who, by right, do not want to play against a badly/unpainted army.
Do any of you go to your local store/club and play pick-up games?
If you do, do you ask to see the other players army first then turn them down there and then, or do you go to the table, get all your kit out, then start to pack up when you see the bare metal/plastic?
Or do you play the game, during which asking them why they haven't painted there army then give advice/decide not to play them again?

There are good ways to turn down a game and bad ways to turn down a game. I'm not asking why, that is known, i'm asking how.

Templar Ben
27-03-2008, 11:30
PORCHHAMMER!? Would that be a term used to discribe lazy gamers who sit on there ass and stare at there models?

I believe it is in reference to the movie Clerks 2. Porchmonkey is a racial slur in the States and in the movie Randall states his desire to take back the word as a general term for lazy individuals regardless of race.

To see the scene go to youtube and do a search on the above.

Freakiq
27-03-2008, 12:23
Anyway, a question to the people who, by right, do not want to play against a badly/unpainted army.
Do any of you go to your local store/club and play pick-up games?
If you do, do you ask to see the other players army first then turn them down there and then, or do you go to the table, get all your kit out, then start to pack up when you see the bare metal/plastic?
Or do you play the game, during which asking them why they haven't painted there army then give advice/decide not to play them again?

There are good ways to turn down a game and bad ways to turn down a game. I'm not asking why, that is known, i'm asking how.

Since I know every gamer at my local club it's not a problem.

And on the topic of why game? I play to win just like any other guy but I'd never use an unpainted army.

It's just that I care about the looks of the battle, I want to charge my Glade Riders into a unit of valiant knights or something similar not into a grey mass of statues.

jedipenguin
27-03-2008, 13:12
The debate that has arisen out of this thread makes me despair for the human race.

If you choose to play anybody regardless of how their army is painted/converted/assembled/composed becuase you enjoy the game regardless of these factors, thats nice, more power to you.

If you choose not to play people based on how their army is painted/converted/assembled/composed becuase your enjoyment of the game is affected by these factors, thats nice, more power to you as well.

People play who they choose to play for their own reasons. End. Of. Story.

Anyway, as to the original topic, I dont mind the idea of maybe one wraith being represented this way, i'd even go so far as to say I'd find it amusing, but I would draw the line at somebody doing it with an entire army/squad as it introduces too many issues with LOS and what is actually being represented.

jfrazell
27-03-2008, 13:27
As for excuses for not painting, one of my mates had to give up painting because he gets so much crap from his parents about it being a waste of time. Granted his parents are crazy. He's a 20+ something college student, how much crap does it take to convince an adult to stop something? (note he tends to be quite insubordinate) Quite a bit, IMO. (interesting to note that his mom collects princess Dianna dolls :rolleyes:)


As a Parent-he can rightfully complain when he pays his own way through college and is not leeching off mom and dad at home. But I digress :evilgrin:

Moostikal The Confused
27-03-2008, 15:07
I believe it is in reference to the movie Clerks 2. Porchmonkey is a racial slur in the States and in the movie Randall states his desire to take back the word as a general term for lazy individuals regardless of race.

To see the scene go to youtube and do a search on the above.

Or i could push play... In said scene he states that his grandmother used to call him a porchmonkey because he would sit on his porch and stare at his neabours(sp?). he used it to disparrage(again sp?) lazy people and i'll say not one more word down that road because that way lies trouble regardless of intent.

Freakiq, if you know everyone in your group and they all know your views on the matter then my point and percieved problem with you is rendered moot. I do not have a problem with having standards but i do with people bein insulting. As such i apologise if i insulted you.
I painted my bloodletters to look like grey statues(no, i really did) just out of interest, would you be ok charging at them:p?

The Orange
27-03-2008, 15:56
As a Parent-he can rightfully complain when he pays his own way through college and is not leeching off mom and dad at home. But I digress :evilgrin:

Which he actually does ;). You'd be surprised how reliant they are on him. Just to show how messed up it is, they had him work as their delivery boy for their flower shop, they didn't pay him, or give him gas money.


It's like suggesting musicians are similar to racists because they don't want to play with someone who has no instrument or sense of rhythm, but who might have a wonderful personality and a deep love for rock and roll.

Yet another great analogy, because me suggesting you play against a sub-par army is exactly like a musician playing with someone with no instruments. :rolleyes:

I'm sorry if I been a bit unclear, frankly I think your choice to turn down people on the basis of the looks of their army is lame. Sorry but yes I'm judging you, as will everyone else that sees you do it. If you feel so justified in turning down people for those reasons, why not tell them point blank why your turning them down? Do you tell them that? Do you tell them that their armies look bad and thats the reason you don't play against them. Or do you skirt around the issue and come up with some other polite excuse? If the later that tells me just how justified your excuse is.

Weather or not a person is aware of your reasons, doesn't change weather those reasons are justified or not, and as I said, IMO yours are not. It's fine by me if thats the way you roll, but I'll have my reservations about people that display such judgment as will other hobbiest you run into. Whats so bad about me telling you that people will think that about you?

Adept
27-03-2008, 18:46
Weather or not a person is aware of your reasons, doesn't change weather those reasons are justified or not, and as I said, IMO yours are not.

Why not?

stupid ten character limit

jfrazell
27-03-2008, 18:55
Which he actually does ;). You'd be surprised how reliant they are on him. Just to show how messed up it is, they had him work as their delivery boy for their flower shop, they didn't pay him, or give him gas money.



Is he still living at home?

Chaplain of Chaos
27-03-2008, 19:48
You and Chaplain of Chaos have both stated that the look of an army is an unimportant part of the game

I said the look of the army should not determine your enjoyment of spending an afternoon gaming with people (if they are fun to be around).

I have not misinterpreted what you are saying to serve my argument I have rationally and politley expressed my opinions then supported that opinion.

When it comes down to it it's all about etiquette so it's really impossible to find a single correct perspective. I have conceded to you that painting and aesthetics are important parts of GW's miniature range. Why can't you come to the middle on this?

I don't even know why you would say that I think painting and modeling is inconsequential in most of my last posts I expressely said that painting is an admirable and valued part of the game. Yet I think that the painting is 'part' of the game and while it enhances the expireance it's hard for me to understand how it could dictate your enjoyment of the game.

I was only ever saying it's a bit rude to turn down a game solely because of the apperance of the guys army because it is my firm belief that one can enjoy a game of Warhammer regardless of the apperance of the models. This is because as human beings we have control of our mindset, and playing the game with a positive and jovial attitude will lead to enjoyment regardless of army conditions.

Makiaveli
27-03-2008, 20:03
I believe it is in reference to the movie Clerks 2. Porchmonkey is a racial slur in the States and in the movie Randall states his desire to take back the word as a general term for lazy individuals regardless of race.

To see the scene go to youtube and do a search on the above.


Never saw that movie and they may have said it there. BUT in the Southern states "porchmonkey" is the same as rugrat or curtain climber. Ie means a young child, toddler etc. A porchmonkey would just be one who is allowed outside on the porch, and not loose in the yard. Then they become yardapes.

Now I'm sure some people use them in a racist way, but then they are ****** so we can safely ignore there interpretation of the language.


EDIT: Wow just realized took me 16 posts to make one that had absolutely jacksquat to do with 40K. That might be a new forum record for me. *insert frowny face here*

Freakiq
27-03-2008, 20:52
I painted my bloodletters to look like grey statues(no, i really did) just out of interest, would you be ok charging at them:p?

I'd love to, I think it would be a neat theme for a khorne army especially since the bloodthirster was a living statue in GW's heroquest boardgame. :)

The Orange
27-03-2008, 21:52
Why not?

the army should not determine your enjoyment of spending an afternoon gaming with people (if they are fun to be around).
That sums it up pretty much. Fun can be had without paint.


Is he still living at home?
"Is he still living at home for free" would be a better question.


A porchmonkey would just be one who is allowed outside on the porch, and not loose in the yard. Then they become yardapes.


Those are keepers :p.

Adept
27-03-2008, 21:58
That sums it up pretty much. Fun can be had without paint.

But if two people are equally 'fun' to be around, and one has a well modelled and painted army, while the other doesn't, why is it wrong of me to choose to play the well modelled and painted army?

Imperialis_Dominatus
27-03-2008, 22:03
Mostly that consists of trying to counter a bunch of spiteful nonsense until people pretend to be tired and leave.

:rolleyes: Me, right? Cool, dude.



Weather or not a person is aware of your reasons, doesn't change weather those reasons are justified or notWhy not?

Whether your reasons are justified or not, why would they be justified just because someone didn't know them? I think that's the question there.

The Orange
27-03-2008, 22:08
But if two people are equally 'fun' to be around, and one has a well modeled and painted army, while the other doesn't, why is it wrong of me to choose to play the well modeled and painted army?

Interesting question as it assumes that without the choice (only one of them is around to play) you'd have no problem playing that person painted army or not.

senorcardgage
28-03-2008, 00:44
I know a guy who uses merely an arm of a pair of legs as zombies. He must get like 60 models out of one box!!

Chaplain of Chaos
28-03-2008, 02:02
Also In that situation with three people.. why exclude the third person. Why not figure out a way you could all play. The point is, people should always make the effort and make sacrifices to be respectful and inclusive with their gaming.

Nephilim of Sin
28-03-2008, 02:43
Never saw that movie and they may have said it there. BUT in the Southern states "porchmonkey" is the same as rugrat or curtain climber. Ie means a young child, toddler etc. A porchmonkey would just be one who is allowed outside on the porch, and not loose in the yard. Then they become yardapes.

Now I'm sure some people use them in a racist way, but then they are ****** so we can safely ignore there interpretation of the language....

Not sure what part of the south you are in, but indeed, in the Southern States, it has a negative racist connotation. At least, that is how it started, and that is the use it has in more rural areas. People may have tried to change the meaning, or give another explanation for why they use it (the "no, I didn't mean it like that" ignorant approach), but if you use it in certain circles, they will not think you mean 'rugrat'. Personally, I think this should be added to the swear filter, and I am surprised it made it through the discussion this far.

Furthermore, why are we still talking about unpainted armies when that is not even the original topic?

Logarithm Udgaur
28-03-2008, 03:03
Because we are in the Warseer general discussion area, where the original topic has little or nothing to do with the posts that follow.
Back to the original topic, some people have stated that they would not play such an army because it would cause LOS issues. I cannot see how this would happen really, as a half wraith would not really be able to hide behind anything that a full wraith could not.

The Orange
28-03-2008, 05:25
You need to reverse that Logarithm. Would a normal wrath be able to hide behind something that a half wrath could?

Logarithm Udgaur
28-03-2008, 06:10
They still count as being size two right? I do not see how this would be a problem. What is someone modeled their Wraith in a coiling position?

Shadowheart
28-03-2008, 08:00
Yet another great analogy, because me suggesting you play against a sub-par army is exactly like a musician playing with someone with no instruments. :rolleyes:
It's a perfectly serviceable analogy. That guy might think it's all about the lifestyle and the air guitar, whereas the band is interested in making actual music. Different ideas of what constitutes being in a band, just like we have different ideas of what constitutes having a game of 40K.


If you feel so justified in turning down people for those reasons, why not tell them point blank why your turning them down?
Where the heck does this come from now? Of course I'll tell them, if they want to know anyway.


Weather or not a person is aware of your reasons, doesn't change weather those reasons are justified or not, and as I said, IMO yours are not. It's fine by me if thats the way you roll, but I'll have my reservations about people that display such judgment as will other hobbiest you run into. Whats so bad about me telling you that people will think that about you?
You or anyone else doesn't need to think my reasons are justified in order to accept my reasons, shut the **** up and leave me to it. And when you do speak, do it for yourself, don't go dragging "what people think" and "how life works" into it. The world will do what it'll do without you annoying me with wannabe mentoring.


I don't even know why you would say that I think painting and modeling is inconsequential...
I can't read your mind, only your posts, which included you saying "painted models aren't important" and "yet aesthetics are only a single aspect that exists independently of the game itself".
I know it's possible to do 40K without paint, much like it's possible to eat cake without icing. Don't mean everyone likes cake without icing, now does it.
And I can top your "I don't need paint to enjoy 40K". I can enjoy spending time with people without 40K.

Koryphaus
28-03-2008, 08:22
Robert Jordan could have cut out all of the "so-and-so of x house met so-and-so of y house with z confused Aes Sedai" crap and finished the series before he sadly passed.

Robert Jordan died? Im devastated..:cries: That aweful. I'm genuinely shattered to hear it..

I had no idea about that, but I just looked him up on the web and apparently he maintained that the book will get published even if "the worst actually happens". On December 7, 2007 Tor Books announced that Brandon Sanderson had been chosen to finish the Wheel of Time series.

Ronin_eX
28-03-2008, 08:28
You need to reverse that Logarithm.

It wasn't until I looked at the user's name you were replying to that I noticed that I realized you weren't talking about math... I need sleep. o_o

Nephilim of Sin
28-03-2008, 08:54
.....
You or anyone else doesn't need to think my reasons are justified in order to accept my reasons, shut the **** up and leave me to it.

And this is where people believe the 'snobbish' attitude comes into play. No, no one needs to accept your reasons. However, expect those reasons to be ridiculed when they are above the norm. When you (the general sense, not an attack against you personally) state a contrary opinion, others will come back to try and understand your reasoning. No one is going to convince anyone of anything, obviously, as we each have our own opinion. That is the way that you and others feel. Those that don't will equally state why they think that idea is rubbish, just as those that oppose the 'norm' will state theirs viewpoint the same.




I can't read your mind, only your posts, which included you saying "painted models aren't important" and "yet aesthetics are only a single aspect that exists independently of the game itself".

Again, a point I made that went unnoticed, aesthetics are already included. Again, if we are basing it upon that, then we are buying models that we already think are aesthetically pleasing. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many whine threads about "that sculpt looks like crap". We paint them to tailor them to our tastes. What some people have a problem with are people painting them to suit another's taste. I would much rather play an unpainted army than play one which was dipped in almost dry enamel to meet painting standards, which seems to be something that others would not have a problem with so long as it is 'painted'.

This is perhaps the one part of the 'argument' that I have a problem with. My personal question, again, is if one is more concerned with the way the models look, and pushing painted models around a beautiful board with terrain, then what is the point of gaming? It seems that the viewpoint is more focused on the hobby aspect, not the gaming one. Furthermore, why not then just use prepaints? Again, this is not an attack, but something I genuinely seek an answer to.


Again though, what does this have to do with converted models? How do they affect LOS, etc....where no one can give a valid response as to why they have a problem with poorhammer. I can model my SM with their heads looking down, which could be a height difference. I could model my SM at 'true scale' which would drastically affect LOS. That argument has no legs to stand on. What it appears is that some feel 'threatened' or else upset when someone finds a way to save money on making an army. Might as well hate all the ebayers and Online retailers then. I can make 60 zombies from one box? Converted? Awesome idea! Looks a hell of a lot better than ranking them up as if they were rising from the grave gradually, which makes no sense unless that is one huge graveyard...


Robert Jordan died? Im devastated..:cries: That aweful. I'm genuinely shattered to hear it......

As am I. He was a very talented writer, and I myself only found out through this very forum. There was a thread in Random Musings before you joined that informed us.

squeekenator
28-03-2008, 10:21
Imagine you walk into your LGS to play with your beautifully painted and converted army. You've spent years making it, and it looks fantastic. When you get there, you find someone who has a similarly awesome army. You chat for a bit before the game, and he asks:
"Is that Gretchin over there converted?"
"No, there's just too many of the little things to make them all unique."
"Oh, um, I just remembered that my car's on fire, see ya!"
You would not shrug and go to play someone else. You would think that this guy is a freak, a scarily elitist wierdo. If all you care about is how things look, why are you playing? If you do enjoy playing the game, don't be so stuck up, just enjoy playing.

Shadowheart
28-03-2008, 11:35
And this is where people believe the 'snobbish' attitude comes into play.
If you say so. I was thinking they believed my attitude snobbish because I thought myself better than them, but according to you, it comes into play when I'm keeping my standards and reasons to myself.


However, expect those reasons to be ridiculed when they are above the norm.
Once again, I really don't need, and more importantly want, you folks to tell me that. That I don't sprout observations myself is not an open invitation to supply me with some. I'm sure you're all very proud of all the stuff you think you've figured out, but if you go bugging people with it, don't expect them to share your enthusiasm.


We paint them to tailor them to our tastes. What some people have a problem with are people painting them to suit another's taste.
Which, basically, nobody's been advocating, and I think we all agree with your sentiment. Like I've said before, I'm looking for people who already, of their own accord, do stuff the way I like it. But I fully expect people to interpret that as me trying to make people do stuff the way I like it.


My personal question, again, is if one is more concerned with the way the models look, and pushing painted models around a beautiful board with terrain, then what is the point of gaming?
It's not an either/or situation. It's not even necessarily a case of concidering the 'hobby' aspect more important than the gaming one. It's not like you're less of a gamer because you're more of a hobbyist. I don't think the 'point' of the game changes any, it just additionally becomes a chance to play around with the fruits of your labour.

Freakiq
28-03-2008, 11:53
Seems like this thread is full of people trying desperately to justify their unpainted armies by means of namecalling.

Stop seeing yourself as a victim of the cruel elitist gamers who don't want to play you.

Nephilim of Sin
28-03-2008, 12:29
If you say so. I was thinking they believed my attitude snobbish because I thought myself better than them, but according to you, it comes into play when I'm keeping my standards and reasons to myself.

No, not at all. I was referring to the "Shut the **** up and leave me to it" part. Personally, I can see the 'elitist' attitude, as some put it, being snobbish, which I explained three or four of my posts back in relation to how I myself am a 'movie snob'. I am a snob in certain situations. We all are. I also understand that people are going to confront me on that. It happens.



Once again, I really don't need, and more importantly want, you folks to tell me that. That I don't sprout observations myself is not an open invitation to supply me with some. I'm sure you're all very proud of all the stuff you think you've figured out, but if you go bugging people with it, don't expect them to share your enthusiasm.

That is the 'beauty' of the internet, and forums....:evilgrin:. Much like yourself, I still stand by my view as to why people ridicule those opinions. Posting on the 'net means that you are open to people trying to interpret them, as you put it. You might not want them to, but it does keep the discussion interesting....



Which, basically, nobody's been advocating, and I think we all agree with your sentiment. Like I've said before, I'm looking for people who already, of their own accord, do stuff the way I like it. But I fully expect people to interpret that as me trying to make people do stuff the way I like it.

Good. I can respect that then. May not agree with it on a personal playing level, but then again, I don't have to. Too many times in the multiple threads like these where people are openly talking down about players not painting there armies, and believe themselves to be 'better' than them, which is where I have seen a lot of this animosity rise from before. The fact that you don't feel that way is great, and helps put your opinion more into perspective.



It's not an either/or situation. It's not even necessarily a case of concidering the 'hobby' aspect more important than the gaming one. It's not like you're less of a gamer because you're more of a hobbyist. I don't think the 'point' of the game changes any, it just additionally becomes a chance to play around with the fruits of your labour.

I can agree here, and thank you for answering my question.


Seems like this thread is full of people trying desperately to justify their unpainted armies by means of namecalling.

Stop seeing yourself as a victim of the cruel elitist gamers who don't want to play you.


Right....so let's make our point by name-calling :rolleyes:? Unpainted armies are justified. Even if someone doesn't feel like painting at all, it is justified. People may just not see your point of view on the argument that you made on how you prefer to play, and this post doesn't really help that. The post above your own does that though.

Master Jeridian
28-03-2008, 12:41
Right....so let's make our point by name-calling ? Unpainted armies are justified. Even if someone doesn't feel like painting at all, it is justified. People may just not see your point of view on the argument that you made on how you prefer to play, and this post doesn't really help that. The post above your own does that though.

Who chooses to play unpainted given the choice?
If by waving a magic wand you army was painted how you wanted- would you want to play painted, or 'prefer unpainted'?

Playing unpainted is because you don't have the time or the will to paint the models- I've started Orks and so have a horde of grey at the moment. I'm slowly getting them painted- because I both don't have much time, and can't stand painting.
But I'd much rather play them all painted if I could, I'm not wearing a 'Grey is Great' badge to pledge my support for unpainted armies as a pride march against people who just wanted their opponent to put in the effort to have painted models like themselves.


So can anyone honestly say given the choice between a painted army and unpainted- they choose to use unpainted?

Nephilim of Sin
28-03-2008, 12:48
.....
So can anyone honestly say given the choice between a painted army and unpainted- they choose to use unpainted?

Yep. Those that don't buy 'prepaints'. Even if prepaints are horrid. Even if GW did prepaints, I doubt everyone would go out and buy them because they someday wish they could paint their own.

Yes, if you could wave a magic wand, then sure I would have them painted. You can't, and that was not even what I was referring to. I said nothing about people wanting their armies to be completely metal/grey, I said it was justified. However, thank you for displaying reasons as to why they are justified. I forgot to put that part.

Freakiq
28-03-2008, 12:51
If you have time to play you have time to paint, but if you don't want to paint don't complain about people not wanting to play against an unpainted army.

Nephilim of Sin
28-03-2008, 13:03
@Freakiq: Now see, that is the kind of reasoning that a lot of people have problems with, and something I thought we had avoided with this discussion. Quite honestly, it is pure crap. It may work for you, it may work for others, and that is great. If people can get their army painted, that is great. However, if they believe they don't have time to paint, then they are on a limited schedule. Is it better that they spend those few hours they get to game (each week if they are lucky) making sure that their army is painted so they don't have to hear comments like this, or is it better they have fun?

Should they complain because someone won't play against them? No. They may think you are a snob, or an 'elitist', but that is all that will happen. But it is ridiculous to assume that they should have the time to paint and sacrifice their game to get things painted, which the first line of your post sounded like. Different people have different situations. It is not black and white, it is really all grey (no pun intended :D).

Freakiq
28-03-2008, 13:21
@Freakiq: Now see, that is the kind of reasoning that a lot of people have problems with, and something I thought we had avoided with this discussion. Quite honestly, it is pure crap. It may work for you, it may work for others, and that is great. If people can get their army painted, that is great. However, if they believe they don't have time to paint, then they are on a limited schedule. Is it better that they spend those few hours they get to game (each week if they are lucky) making sure that their army is painted so they don't have to hear comments like this, or is it better they have fun?

Should they complain because someone won't play against them? No. They may think you are a snob, or an 'elitist', but that is all that will happen. But it is ridiculous to assume that they should have the time to paint and sacrifice their game to get things painted, which the first line of your post sounded like. Different people have different situations. It is not black and white, it is really all grey (no pun intended :D).

The thing I have a problem with is people who come to play a game, find out that everyone is busy and just stand there watching for several hours and then complain about lack of time.

If they don't want to paint their things then just go ahead and say it, don't make up excuses cause I won't play you out of sympathy.

jfrazell
28-03-2008, 16:08
The thing I have a problem with is people who come to play a game, find out that everyone is busy and just stand there watching for several hours and then complain about lack of time.

If they don't want to paint their things then just go ahead and say it, don't make up excuses cause I won't play you out of sympathy.

If he doesn't want to play people who use unpainted minis thats fine. Just as I am not required to play anyone I don't like. If thats a factor in his decisioning well good for him. he'll miss out on different opponents but thats his opportunity cost.

Logarithm Udgaur
28-03-2008, 16:46
Well my (admittedly weak) attempt to steer this conversation back on topic failed. Oh well.

Burning Star IV
28-03-2008, 17:03
Stop seeing yourself as a victim of the cruel elitist gamers who don't want to play you.

QFT

I was done with this thread, but now that it's become such a big deal I couldn't resist returning.


Imagine you walk into your LGS to play with your beautifully painted and converted army. You've spent years making it, and it looks fantastic. When you get there, you find someone who has a similarly awesome army. You chat for a bit before the game, and he asks:
"Is that Gretchin over there converted?"
"No, there's just too many of the little things to make them all unique."
"Oh, um, I just remembered that my car's on fire, see ya!"
You would not shrug and go to play someone else. You would think that this guy is a freak, a scarily elitist wierdo. If all you care about is how things look, why are you playing? If you do enjoy playing the game, don't be so stuck up, just enjoy playing.

Well it's impressive that you supposedly know what one would think in such a situation, but your being wrong makes it a bit less impressive. I would think "hmm, never seen that before, oh well." Then I would go play someone else...maybe even sans shrug.

"just enjoy playing" you say. Well I mean, yeah... I simply don't enjoy the game if the pieces don't look good, but now that I've been instructed to "just enjoy playing" I think I'll be able to get past it. Quite a method you've come up with.

The Orange
28-03-2008, 18:24
It's a perfectly serviceable analogy.
Not really, as paint has little to no effect on game play. Your analogy would be more akin to someone trying to play 40k without any models. Thus I think it's a bad analogy.


Of course I'll tell them, if they want to know anyway. You should note that I did ask weather you to tell your opponents or not. All I can say is at least your honest.


Seems like this thread is full of people trying desperately to justify their unpainted armies by means of name calling.

Oh, personal attack fallacy, your on a roll mate. FYI I do play with fully painted armies, because I like holding myself to that standard, but I don't hold other people to that standard. I know people have a wealth of crap to deal with in life, thus painting their army can't be a priority, that shouldn't prevent them from enjoying this hobby and the community it entails, so I happily play against people with unpainted armies (notabily most of my gaming group).


If you have time to play you have time to paint
Don't forget, painting requires buying hobby supplies, gaming does not. The main reason I've been able to improve my painting from when I did start the hobby is only because I've build up a wealth of hobby supplies to help me do it. When all you've got is 3 pots of paint, and a giant old worn out brush, all the time in the world won't help get you a decently painted army.


They still count as being size two right? I do not see how this would be a problem. What is someone modeled their Wraith in a coiling position?
The issue is more about when using real LOS, half a model is easier to hide then a full model. But yes, given area terrains prevalence in most games, those kinds of quick cheats are probably not worth the time and effort, anyways, and their quite transparent to any opponent.


The thing I have a problem with is people who come to play a game, find out that everyone is busy and just stand there watching for several hours and then complain about lack of time.

Well fine, since when have people like that been the sole topic of this discussion? This topic is about under-par armies in general, not about people who you already know are lazy gits. Your overgeneralizing (yet again another fallacy). It's like me seeing one boring game of WFB, and coming to the conclusion that all WFB games are boring.



I simply don't enjoy the game if the pieces don't look good
Well then go ahead and keep playing that way, however I find it hard to believe that a non-painted army would make it impossible for you to enjoy the game. It's more likely the fact that you've already set yourself up for disappointment, and avoiding such games, you'll never really know if you could have, meanwhile these players get the short end of the stick because they'll get constantly snubbed because your to busy to look outside of your bubble.

Imperialis_Dominatus
28-03-2008, 18:33
Seems like this thread is full of people trying desperately to justify their unpainted armies by means of namecalling.

You're right, your side has been the epitome of reason and decency.


shut the **** up

Oh. Wait.

Maybe we should just get this closed.


Well my (admittedly weak) attempt to steer this conversation back on topic failed. Oh well.

Yeah, generally happens here.

Easy E
28-03-2008, 19:30
I've noticed a trend in the hobby where one persons' time, effort, and money is considered more valid then another persons' time, money, and effort. Generally the difference of what makes one persons' time, money, and effort more valid then someone elses is the execution. If something looks really good*, then it is deemed valid. If it looks anything less than really good, it is deemed not valid.

Has anyone else noticed this?**

*Really good= In the top 90%.

**Note: I'm not excluding myself from this trend, just observing it.

Logarithm Udgaur
28-03-2008, 20:08
Pretty much what you said. With the amount of really good painters and sculptors around at this time, it is much harder for hacks like me to look like we know what we are doing. I do not necessarily think this is a bad thing though. I am not going to spend my time or money on something I do not think looks good, no matter who attaches their name to it.
On a completely different note, none of the Neo-squat links in your sig seem to be working.

Burning Star IV
28-03-2008, 20:23
impossible[/U] for you to enjoy the game. It's more likely the fact that you've already set yourself up for disappointment, and avoiding such games, you'll never really know if you could have, meanwhile these players get the short end of the stick because they'll get constantly snubbed because your to busy to look outside of your bubble.

Is that more likely? Can you specify the legitimate means by which you have come to this conclusion? It seems like pure speculation to me. I avoid such games now, yes, but I have played such games in the past. Thus I have a solid point of reference. Where's yours?

Too busy to look outside of my bubble... I'm not really following your meaning here, care to elaborate?

BladeWalker
28-03-2008, 20:57
On the original topic, I don't find cutting a model in half to be a creative conversion... just a cheap way to get two models. I'd rather play against something that was just a proxy than a mutilated miniature. This is only my own personal preference though.

My overall feeling on "Poorhammer" is that you should choose a army that suits you in every way. The way it looks, the way it plays, and how much it costs should be factors to consider before you invest time and effort into a army. Why would someone choose an army that they can't afford to buy proper models for? If you can't afford the models for the army then play at a lower points level until you can.

I really don't like to see unpainted models on the table and the elitist attitude I have towards it comes from spending my own time/money/creativity on the armies/table/terrain that I have. I play for the awesome scenes of battle that the game creates. A grey army destroys the mood and look of the table overall, I would pass on a game vs. a unpainted army not because of any negative feelings toward the unfinished armies owner but because it ruins the whole look of the game that I have worked so hard to attain.

As nasty as this thread has become, I found it a very interesting read.

Adra
28-03-2008, 21:46
hmmm its always tricky. i dont like playing against unpainted armies myself and it does get frustrating when week after week you see no attempt to get any painting done. i dont agree with the "if you have time to play you have to paint" but i do belive that if you have time to build you have time to paint. gaming is different and is something you can do as you go along but assembly and painting are a continuing process and as long as we can see progress i dont think anyone would be upset by that. i totaly understand thouse who dont want to reward what they see as laziness because i would do the same but an unpainted army does not indicate laziness. two weeks later its in the same state, fair enough.

Easy E
28-03-2008, 22:15
I am not going to spend my time or money on something I do not think looks good, no matter who attaches their name to it.
On a completely different note, none of the Neo-squat links in your sig seem to be working.

Does this mean that you won't play them, you won't buy something from them, or does it mean something else? I ask for clarification only?

Thanks for the call out on the links. I'm working on the problem now, but I'm not smart enough to figure it out yet.

ankara halla
28-03-2008, 23:03
This thread makes my brain hurt.

Clearly, there are two (roughly) conflicting points of view here. Both valid and easily explainable to any rational being who possesses the tiniest bit of empathy. Clearly, there are people involved in this social hobby of ours that lack even that. It makes me loose my faith in humanity.

I mean, what the heck! It's pretty simple. Some people like the game, others like to paint minies, others like to convert minies, others like to game with painted minies, others just like to have a good time with toy soldiers and yet others are in it for the background.

Who are any of us/you/they to say how to enjoy our hobby. Yeah, passing judgement on a personal preference, that never goes out of style... and don't even try to pretend you aren't doing that, you all know who you are.

This thread makes me remember why I'm cynical about the human race, the intolerance of people is just uncanny.

[/preacher mode off]

Captain Micha
28-03-2008, 23:15
I suppose, these same people would suddenly recoil in horror at seeing a tie dyed colored army as well? Even if they were painted well because "it offends my sense of good gaming and visual style"?

Paint vs unpainted, yeah I would -prefer- to face a painted army. but you know what? if the other guy has around 100 models out there and they aren't fully painted. I'm not going to complain. Ever try painting 100+ models in a day? a weekend? a week? two weeks? yeah... thought not.

Even if it's a 'small count army' I don't mind. In some ways it's better really. They are whatever color you make them in your head that way. :D

People hate playing against unpainted armies because their minds aren't capable of imagining color otherwise :p :p

squeekenator
29-03-2008, 00:57
Well it's impressive that you supposedly know what one would think in such a situation, but your being wrong makes it a bit less impressive. I would think "hmm, never seen that before, oh well." Then I would go play someone else...maybe even sans shrug.

Pretty much. I probably exaggerated a bit too much; I didn't mean you would stand around for a minute thinking "lul wut?", but I doubt you would be able to find anyone who would find that behaviour rational. Basically, I'm disagreeing with the comments such as, what was it, the 'last bastion of reason'? Just because it makes sense from your point of view doesn't mean you're right. You agree with people who share your point of view, but it's quite possible that everyone else thinks you're a weirdo. I hope that got the point across, I'm having trouble getting my ideas into words.


"just enjoy playing" you say. Well I mean, yeah... I simply don't enjoy the game if the pieces don't look good, but now that I've been instructed to "just enjoy playing" I think I'll be able to get past it. Quite a method you've come up with.

My point was that, if you actually enjoy playing, you should be able to do so regardless of what things look like. Of course you wouldn't enjoy it as much, but I believe you would still be able to get some enjoyment out of it. Of course, it's possible that you couldn't, but my comment was to the world at large, not to you in particular.

Logarithm Udgaur
29-03-2008, 02:42
Does this mean that you won't play them, you won't buy something from them, or does it mean something else? I ask for clarification only?

Thanks for the call out on the links. I'm working on the problem now, but I'm not smart enough to figure it out yet.

I will play pretty much anyone, regardless of the paint state of there army. My comment meant that, in the case of 40K, I would not buy something I did not think looks good, just because it is the "Official"tm model. In a larger sense, I would not go see a movie that looks like drek because some big shot director put his name on it, I would not buy a car because Shaq told me to, etc...
Considering my army is only about 1/4 painted and only about 2/3 GW models, playing whatever is pretty much the only credible position.

Torga_DW
29-03-2008, 05:10
@I_D: hey I_D. Been a while. Hehe, just read about 9 pages of this thread then got bored and skipped to the end. Kind of reminds me of my old pet cockatoo, had a lot to say but tended to repeat himself.

Back on topic, i probably would have a problem with it. I don't care about how well (or even if) your painting is. I'm pretty WYSIWYG. Thats not just about weapon options, but things like model size. Wraiths are fairly imposing models, and have a harder time using the same cover that smaller models can make advantage of. Just a tail sticking out of a base would seriously mess with my head on a number of levels. The game gets hard enough to keep track of things, without having to mentally guestimate the spatial location of models.

I don't mind counts as models, so long as they are physically similar to the model they count as. For example, i'm using some imperial terminators in my chaos terminator squad (since i don't have the budget to buy the proper ones atm). But they still have as close to the same weapons as they're supposed to have that i can manage, given the differences between traitor and loyalist weapon options. However, using grotz as chaos terminators, thats just wrong to me. That would seriously mess with peoples heads.

As for everyone else arguing about snobhammer and poorhammer, well i guess it comes down to circumstance. In my local area, if you didn't play against unpainted / half painted armies, you would never play a game. Theres like one guy at our club that has a fully painted army, and it looks like he got a blind-folded chimpanzee to paint it for him. He's trying to paint his tau now for some tournament coming up soonish. Yes, his armies technically count as fully painted, but wheres the value in the worlds most shocking paint job?

Me, i field unpainted models. I see painting as a separate aspect of the hobby to gaming. I paint when i have time and i'm in the mood. Takes a while to get anything done, always have unpainted models, but when i'm finished they look damn cool. I'd rather be super slack and produce cool paintjobs then rush through them and have them look like i just dipped them in a can of extra thick house paint.

But its a free country. Different ppl get enjoyment from different things. Maybe that makes some ppl elitist. Oh well, i'm already used to that. I'm happy in my local area at least. I hope other people are happy too.

Shadowheart
30-03-2008, 17:45
No, not at all. I was referring to the "Shut the **** up and leave me to it" part.
Well, yes... what else do you suppose I thought you were referring to? What is snobby about not wanting to be hassled? (And regarding the tone of my phrasing, I was responding to someone who'd just compared me to a racist.)

The thing with being different is that you're vastly outnumbered by people that aren't. If there is to be a conflict every time two people with differing views meet, then the ones that are different will have great deal more conflict on their hands. Of course it's often not just one person on each side of the conflict either, with the different one being at a disadvantage.

No matter how mild that conflict is, or even if it counts as conflict per se, it takes some energy and time to resolve every time. I don't have the patience and positive energy of a saint, and even if I had I'd spend it on other things. There's a limit to how much hassle I'll put up with, and if I let people, I'd inevitably reach that limit.

At that point I'd say one of two things could happen. One is I give up doing things the way I want and start doing them the way I'm expected to do them. The other is that I just stop going near anyone that disagrees with me and find or found a place where the majority agrees with me. But it was a "painted armies only" club that actually provoked the previous 'debate' we had on this topic, as people thought that idea was terribly elitist too.


That is the 'beauty' of the internet, and forums....
More like the ugly of wanting to hear yourself talk, if you were to ask me.


Too many times in the multiple threads like these where people are openly talking down about players not painting there armies, and believe themselves to be 'better' than them, which is where I have seen a lot of this animosity rise from before.
In my experience there's a heck of a lot more crying about being talked down to then there ever was actual talking down to. People are very eager to profile themselves as not being elitist, and to have something to contrast themselves against they suggest a horde of mean elitists that doesn't exist. I'm not saying there aren't any, but I haven't seen nearly so many as the outcries would suggest.

Morever, I feel that this is leading people to see evil elitists anywhere they can, which in turn leads to people stressing that they're not elitists any time they can. If you say "I like painted armies" you're liable to get suspicious/threatening "you're not some kind of elitist snob, are you?" comments. If this keeps up eventually people will be excusing themselves for bringing a painted army to the table.


Not really, as paint has little to no effect on game play.
Really. Your insistence and assumptions make it even better suited, if anything. You see 40K as being about the game, as you see bands as being about the music, and I'd expect most people you know agree with that, so you take it to be the truth. It seems that when someone comes along with a contrary view, you dismiss it as being wrong.

Now, to me it seems fairly obvious that building miniature armies is the heart of 40K and that the game is basically only an excuse to do something with them. For one thing, that's how the games actually came about - something to do with the miniatures people were starting to collect. To me doing 40K for the game seems silly, and I don't understand why anyone would want to do it.

But I try not to inflict my lack of understanding on other people, nor do I go and tell them they're wrong because their approach differs from what I'd expect a sensible person to do. I mean, I do think you're daft treating your minis like playing counters, but I recognise that that's just what I think and not the standard anyone else should measure themselves by. Yet I'm branded as an elitist somehow.


Oh. Wait.

Maybe we should just get this closed.
Look, if you're trying to score points in a game of "wait for someone to make a boo-boo", I concede the match. Congratulations, go celebrate. I mean, that's the second time you've done this. If you want to dismiss me because my posts aren't beyond reproach then you've got your excuse.