" The current trend to use unpainted miniatures " Topic

The point is simple, I think most people in this hobby prefer painted minis. It enhances the look and feel of the battles and provides a visual spectacle.

However, for many of us, painting isn't easy, we don't have as much time as we'd like and we want our minis to look good.

Having someone destroy your confidence in your painting ability, and your enjoyment of the game by saying 'no unpainted lead' or 'you're crap for our hobby because you don't paint enough minis' will drive people away from the hobby.

It isn't a case of not wanting to paint the minis, in many cases it's a case of building up the courage to do so.

All I'd like to do now is urge the prolific painters at clubs to take the unpainted crowd under their wing. Organise a club painting workshop. You don't need to paint people's figures for them, just be there to add a little support, give them hints and tips, be constructive and if necessary lie! Telling an inexperienced painter that their figure looks good (even if you don't think it does) could be what spurs them to go on and paint a lot more minis, and hence improve their painting, both in skill and speed.

This discussion is one of the reasons why i left the hobby of wargaming with painted or unpainted figs. I turned to board- and computergames and i'm not ashamed of it.
I never regreted my descision for one moment. I now can paint and do whatever en whenever i like with my minis.
So i agree with 'cosmotiger' and also with 'the hobbybox'
For me there are more things in life than 'wargaming'.
So 'miniatures' and everything connected to it is one of my hobbies and not a way life.

I prefer to see and use painted minis, but I'm not so fanatical as to declare that only painted minis can be used in my games. Most of us in my group prefer to use our painted pieces, but there are times when is simply isn't practical. There's only so much time in the day, as many have pointed out.

Tolerance is good to get people interested at the start. Encourage them to do more painting and building as they go and their skill increases. But don't be a militaristic fanatical tyrant over it. Rather unnecessary, I think.

Club gaming night is Thursday night at my house. No unpainted minis allowed on the table. Period.

w.

Man you guys are weird. Seriously.

I paint very well (I have 5 golden demon trophies, although none are actually 1st place). I almost always field painted minis in Warmachine – for me, the goal is to paint something really awesome looking for my opponent to enjoy fighting against.

I frequently play against people who have bare metal and maybe even arms and heads missing!

Doesn't bother me one bit. It's a fun game and our club has a great atmosphere. It's very open and inviting, and tolerant. And because of that, it has grown in size considerably. I think the lack of draconian paint rules has really helped Privateer's fanbase grow.

Seeing nicely painted figures often inspires people to try and paint their own figs. Often it's a VERY slow process as people learn, get discouraged by initial results, etc. But I think it's more encouraging and conducive to growing the hobby than telling them "You can't play unless you paint your army".

Blah. That attitude hurts the hobby, it doesn't help the hobby.

I think Flashy has the answer, mentoring.

Don't like to see unpainted minis? Sit down with the guy and show him how easy it is to do a basic job. Don't sneer, advise. Offer assistance, guidance and encouragement.

Don't complain, inspire.

Well, I spend a lot more time painting than playing. But given a choice between playing with someone with unpainted figures and playing with someone who thinks they have the right to tell other people – in public, no less – how they should be allowed to enjoy their own hobby? Mr Unpainted, without a moment's hesitation.

Even the "mentoring" approach seems patronising. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with playing with unpainted, but sculpted or moulded, playing pieces. It's what everyone does with chess and Monopoly. Or should they be compelled or even encouraged to paint up the top hat and the little tin dog?

Memo to self: If you ever release a set of rules, require a significant moral penalty to unpainted troops.

I truly did not realize that this has always been an issue, so please pardon my ignorance.

@ Cyberwolf1971
My mantra for painting includes the basics. Painted uniforms, boots/belts, weapons and flesh on a painted base. Nothing too fancy just a block painted miniature.

I guess I was just lucky growing up with the local gaming community. They participated in the hobby of miniature war gaming. This included collecting, painting and playing games with miniatures. Until 10 or so years ago I had never seen anyone put unpainted minis on a table. This includes at the local club and conventions. I must have had a sheltered life. ;-)

I have never refused to play a game with anyone painted or not. I just do not find much joy in playing against unpainted minis.

I guess there are two kinds of people gamers and hobbyists. Totally separate groups participating in war gaming. I'll just keep playing with like-minded hobbyists and play some games.

EE

I have no problem with filling out an army with some unpainted or primed figures, because you didn't have time to finish everything— but that assumes that you are going to finish it someday. But there are some people who just continue with a partially painted hodgepodge indefinitely. That's what I don't get.

It's all a matter of community standards. And miniature wargaming has a lot of different communities. I mostly play DBA and I don't think I've ever seen someone show up at a DBA tournament with unpainted figures. But that wouldn't lead me to make a blanket statement about miniature wargaming in general. Each group of gamers has its own priorities and concerns.

- Jack

I like the way AK47 puts it: "Players with unpainted figures loose victory points. It's obvious that their commander does not properly care for the troops!"

As a member of a club that helps folks learn how to paint, the motto is: "I don't take casualties from unpainted troops". (All tounge in cheek, y'know, but it does help motivate folks to paint. We don't expect anything more than an effort to try. Spray painted units need not apply unless detailed out.

One must remember why we play with miniatures: For the specticle of it. It significantly enhances the miniature gaming experience when one uses painted minis.

Tom Dye
GFI

I knew a fellow who painted a force, bases and all with silver Tremclad. They WERE painted, but we still said no.

My views :

1) I won't play against or with unpainted figures

2) If I saw them being used at a show here in the UK I'd complain indignantly to the organisers. I strongly believe that it puts a VERY bad face on the 'hobby' and is not to be displayed in public.

3) If people want to play with UP figures at their own club or at home I won't critise them, they can do what they want the way they want to if that gives them enjoyment

4) As I don't play with youngsters at all, my group's 'baby' is still over 40, I'd like to think that I'd be more tolerant with youngsters just starting but I'm not sure I could do it with good grace. I started at 14 and have never played with UP figures myself.

5) I'm possibly going to be running some games at a local youth group later this year and, if the issue arises, my plan would be to run some – 'let's get it painted' sessions before they use their own figures. Encourage them to value the aesthetics as well as the gaming and help them plan their painting so that, between them, they can field armies quickly.

I'm (almost) exclusively an historical player, maybe Fantasy players look at it differently. Fantasy paint jobs seem to be much more of an 'issue' than they are with historicals.

Tony H

barf

There are other reasons to play miniature games than just "the spectacle." That's a perfectly acceptable reason to play the, but not the only. Computer games and board games play differently than miniature games, for reasons other than just the miniatures. They're structured differently. They play differently.

I play miniature games because of how they play. I went out and bought figures to play Seekrieg with, not because I wanted the spectacle (although, I do like the way they look), but because they are, in some ways, more practical than counters or cardboard standups.

The original poster asked if playing with unpainted figures was bad for the hobby. Having been on the receiving end of such elitist snobbery, I have to say I think the attitude that unpainted figures are unacceptable or should be penalized is just as bad if not worse.

Re: the "Hobby." One of my other hobbies is model building. I specialize in armored fighting vehicles, mainly WWII (but also modern stuff). It occusr to me that playing with unpainted armies (and I mean constantly) is sort of like me buying Valor Force or whatever at the local toy store, and calling myself a "modeller." Sure the paintjobs are decent, the pieces themselves fairly accurate. But I would not be participating in the hobby; I'd merely be a collector.

Minis wargames are about the MINIATURES (IMHO). If you intend to buy a pile of lead, tape down the figures to bases, etc. and people refuse to play with you, who is the real loser in that? The people and their "snobbish" ways, or the person that invested a couple hundred dollars into something that is basically a glorified counter? Why not spend a fraction of that and cut the units out of cardboard instead?

I dunno. I think the craftmanship portion of this hobby is just as important, if not MORE so, than the actual game itself. If you choose to play only with unpainted minis, you're either unwilling to fully invest into the hobby, or are in the wrong one IMHO. So why spend the money anyway.

Ultimately, I play minis games because they LOOK cool. I buy the best figures I can find for my armies, because I enjoy painting them, and enjoy the look. If I play a game on a rolled out piece of felt, with ripped up linepaper that has "trees" scrawled on it (and yes, I've seen such games, some with even less than that!), then MY enjoyment of the game in significantly decreased.

Finally, I'm always surprised by the comments "I don't have the time." I have a 2mo old baby at home, and I still can find time to paint a little, as well as take care of her. It's not like the old days, where I can spend hours at the desk painting, but if I can get a half hour (total) in a day, then I'm still painting and making progress…

Damon.

Greetings

As someone whose painting is less than wonderful and rate of painting slow I can appreciate both sides of this debate. However, since whenever we played with Airfix 1/72 and 1/32 figures I have painted before playing. Even my 14 year old is loth to play unless the figures are painted although I wouldn't think to stop him.

If I want a new unit I have to paint it – in fact playing a game usually gets me to paint a few more figures or a tank or two (depending on scale) to an acceptable, though far from brilliant, level.

It can be intimidating starting – one way round is to buy a painted unit at a bring and buy or on eBay and build up from there.

Regards

Edward

A couple of comments and opinions:

1. Miniatures gaming, IMHO, has several elements. One element is the miniatures themselves. However, another element in in the game mechanics. Miniatures gaming is "board free". That means that there is a freedom of movement that is not found in games that employ a square or a hex grid. There are exceptions like SFB, Battletech, some aerial games, and clicky games but these I view as board games with miniatures.

2. The first gaming group that I was ever associated with was a bunch of guys playing 40K. We all had armies in progress to varying degrees. While many times we played with primed figures, there was a understanding that the next time we met, more of each individual's army would be painted.

3. I later became a member of an historical gaming club. It was at a time when just about everyone was preparing for an out-of-town convention where we were all going to enter a big DBM tournament. Again everyone was furiously painting their armies but at the same time practicing with stand-ins. Some times we had the troops on the painting sticks so the only thing we had to practice with was a base with "Cv(s)" written on with a Sharpie. Again, though, there was an understanding that the miniatures were in progress. I don't think the tournament had a "painted only" rule. I don't think any of us would have though it neccessary. No one ever concidered going to the tourney without a painted army.

Normally, though, club games were organized and run by people who either had, or knew who had, enough painted figures to go on the table. Many was the phone call I recieved before the club meeting asking me to bring my New Kingdom Egyptians, Napoleonic French or a couple of my DBA armies.

The bottom line is that I don't think there is anything wrong with setting the expectation that miniatures be painted. There are exceptions, but as long as there is a common expectaion, then people will do their best to field painted armies. There was a collective attitude that prevailed. Although it never happened, I can imagine that someone who might have showed up week after week with the same unpainted figures whould get some friendly chiding.

I guess motivating someone to put painted lead on the table can be positive or negative. That some people must be motivated is without question. Your choice is whether to make a pleasant experience or whether to sour someone forever. The greatest motivation is seeing everyone else's figures and seeing someone else in the group apologizing to everyone for fielding an unpainted miniature. Only the most dense or uncaring person would not get this sort of signal.

I have followed this thread and I see with some regret, that you miss a really critical point.

Why are we in the wargames Hobby?
To see beautiful painted models and have battles in lavish terrain?
To field lead armies in flat props of terrain?
To have glorified counters?
………
No, we are here to have fun and that's what we do by playing a game no mater what the condition of the armies fielded.

A miniatures wargame is a wargame with miniatures, the miniatures are there, are they unpainted, primed, horribly painted, or master classes? It is not of an issue, the real issue is for the players to have fun.

Fun isn't the same thing for all people, some like to paint some not some enjoy playing more than to paint and some enjoy more to paint than to play, to some the amount of battles played is more important to the amount of miniatures fielded painted.

Who is right? Well no one is right and all are, each one to his own self is right, those who like the painted miniatures and those who like to just play, remember miniatures wargames are closely related to the artistic side of it, that is model making and miniatures painting but they are not the one and the same thing.

So to what extent your (in a pure abstract way) having fun ends the others having fun? Immediately after you trespass his realm of perception about the game. This can go either way, but the refusal to play a game against unpainted miniatures or even worse to complaint for their existence to tournament organizers is an act of elitism that undermines the other side. I do not like the "elitist" attitude and that is any attitude that makes someone "holier than thee", does anyone have the right to criticize the painting or lack of in ones army? Not really it's his army, does anyone has the right to deny someone the right to play a wargame? Again no, it's his right to play and have fun the way he likes.

As I said this could go the other way round, but even if you really like to play with full painted armies and well shaped terrain, I don't think the lack of any or both will stop you from playing a wargame and have fun by playing it if it does then you are not interested in playing a wargame but you are interested in watching a wargame, two different things.

So I will answer the initial Question.
In my opinion unpainted armies don't hurt the hobby of wargaming, the people are there to play the battle and as a side bonus for some to paint the miniatures as historically possible for Historical wargames or as they like for Science Fiction or Fantasy wargames.

What does hurt the hobby is the attitude mentioned above, the hobby is comprised of many people some just want to play and are not interested in painting their miniatures, by alienating this group the hobby has less people that can't be good.
While I have supported in the past the painted armies only and the bonus (or just penalty in disguise) of having painted armies in the tournaments, I find myself guilty of hurting the hobby locally, why is that? Because people that didn't want to paint their armies just left either moving on or forming their own groups if that attitude didn't exist they would have stayed in the wargames hobby and probably would attract more.

a small side note is how harmful is the no unpainted miniatures for the new wargamer, a new wargamer with no artistic background (hence no experience) wants to try a wargame, while veteran wargamers are willing to lend him one of their armies to play and see the rules and system (can happen) after seeing that to play with his own army he must field 100+ painted miniatures will he be disheartened? Most will be if he wants to play he will not be able to do so before a month or two pass at least that is discouraging at least and a reason to quit (or not enter) at worst, that can't be helpful.

I also have seen people suggesting that if a player doesn't want to paint his miniatures, then he should quit and start playing board games or computer games? What great power do these people have to dictate what a person wants? A miniature wargame is about a wargame played with miniatures having fun and socialize with other humans is a direct way, it has nothing to do with either boardgames or computer games. Again this attitude pushes people away from the hobby of miniature wargaming.

Sorry for this big post I hope I have not tired you (at least not much), I will finish with my definition of some terms I have seen mentioned above.

I have a few armies painted and a few of armies unpainted plus the big variety of miniatures bought and stored unassembled for some possible future use.

Am I a modeler, since I have painted miniatures? No
Why? Because I usually not pick up a model just for the sole purpose of it to be displayed.
Am I a hoarder, since I have loads of packed mniatures? No
Why? Because I do not collect with the sole purpose of just collecting stuff.
Am I an Impassive member of community that hurts it, since I have unpainted miniatures?
No I am a miniatures wargamer? Why? Because I enjoy playing a miniatures wargame having fun with it and don't turn people off it.

This is my personal opinion on the subject, thanks for your time reading it and sorry if it was tiring.

I've used unpainted minis when I'm home alone and play testing some rules but in public…… Never!!!

Of course I'm the kind of guy who (when stuck in a hotel in Ashville NC due to a snowstorm that shut the interstate down) fought a GASLIGHT battle using only pennies vs. nickels.

The nickels won.

After a club nights gaming DBM, several of us would retire to a local Denny's or Jim's eateries. It would be a nano-second or two before someone would say something like, "If you had only gone around on the flank…". In an instant, sugar packets were deployed facing the dastardly Equal and their nefarious allies, the Sweet-N-Low.

I learned the evolutions of Napoleonic French formations with blue packet Voltigeurs, pink packet Grenadiers, and the white fusiliers. L'ordre mixte and doubling out cavalry squadrons took place at the Battle of Jim's at the stratgic crossroads of Fredricksburg Road and Loop 410.

We we playing miniatures? You bet. Had we been able, we would have hauled the toys from the trunks of our cars and set up a game between the sugar dispencer and ketcup bottle. Circumstances precluded this, however, so we settled for our proxies and carried on.

We were all avid gamers who wouldn't put an unpainted miniature on the table unless circumstances prevented it. The attitude was certainly not elitist in the least. Rather is was one of simple concideration and respect for others. Not everyone painted; some people bought painted figures. However, there is a certain amount of role playing and identification with the troops on the table. It's hard to think like Wellington when you are commanding lumps of lead. It's quite a bit easier to immerse yourself in the game when you are commanding soldiers.

For those that don't want to field painted troops there are alternatives like the very impressive Eagle games which contain lots of pretty plastic minatures, no painting required.

I have a lot of patience and understanding for those who paint slowly (whatever the reason) or those that aquire painted figures slowly (we all have budgets). However I don't understand why I should set aside my enjoyment for the sake of those that won't put out the effort. I concider disrespectful and inconsiderate. Why should I, or anyone else, put aside the investment in time, effort, and expence for the sake of someone who isn't willing to do the same.

As I said before, sometimes circumstances dictate that unpainted miniatures, or sugar packets, get fielded. The standard, though, should always be that painted armies get fielded. Set this expectation and most people will rise to meet it.

Why are we in the wargames Hobby?
To see beautiful painted models and have battles in lavish terrain?…
No, we are here to have fun and that's what we do by playing a game no mater what the condition of the armies fielded.

No, I am here to see beautiful models on lavish terrtain. As far as I'm concerned, the illusion of reality in miniature is a hugely important part of the fun of miniatures games. When the illusion is broken by having unpainted minis on the table, that detracts from my enjoyment of the game. I would never advocate making cruel or snobbish comments to other gamers, but I also will not agree that a game with bare metal figures on plywood is just as good a game as one with beautiful figures and terrain. They are not equivalent.

The same social interaction, and intellectual challenge could be gotten by pushing around paper counters, but that is just not as cool as seeing painted figures on miniature terrain. It's not as fun.

Oddly enough, GW included a rule about this in BFG! If the vessel wasn't painted, it suffered a -1 to its leadership (very bad in that game). If it wasn't even assembled . . .

I've won a few painting awards, and I've got no problem playing against unpainted armies. I would be saddened, however, if there was no drive or progress towards ever getting them painted (ie turning up with their unpainted army every month). I still wouldn't ban them from playing, however, as some opinions here seem to propose.

One of my old clubs gave unpainted miniatures a +1 to be hit or -1 to save if they were unpainted/ basecoated. This was good because it allowed enthusiastic newbies to get their forces on the table, have fun, and have an incentive to get them painted for next time.

I believe a painted army is a self gratification issue, you can't demand from someone to have a painted army. That alone and by itself is a snobbish action.
Why do I paint my armies? Because I like to see them painted, others don't care it's their issue, not mine. If he doesn't want to paint his army then he doesn't want to, if he wants to field a partially painted army it's his problem, why should he be penalized?

I dislike the all army painted rules or else, a new player must be really dedicated to collect and spend money on an army for it to play a few months afterwards since he must paint it, also this turns people from tournaments since most will not enter it as they don't have a painted/ fully painted army. Again I have to stress out that the wargames hobby isn't the same with painting miniatures the later is a nice and artistic bonus for those who want to.

The primary question of this subject was if it hurts the hobby, I remain firm in my belief that it doesn't hurt it but penalties and players alienation do hurt the hobby.

[I've won a few painting awards, and I've got no problem playing against unpainted armies. I would be saddened, however, if there was no drive or progress towards ever getting them painted (ie turning up with their unpainted army every month). I still wouldn't ban them from playing, however, as some opinions here seem to propose.]

This is a position best reserved for a club format. Afterall, if I meet you for a game at a public convention, of what relevance is it if you start painting more when you get home? It is likely that our game may be the only time we meet. The here and now of the game is all that exists.

Cosmotiger speaks for my sentiment on the matter perfectly.

I have never seen anyone play with unpainted miniatures in the UK at any convention I have been to, so I assume that this is part of the "pickup game" style at US conventions that we don't get in UK?

At my club, Guildford, we don't have any rules on what you can or can't play or what you can do, but we all play with painted figures and I honestly think that people wouldn't even think about using unpainted minitaures in anything other than a boardgame like Axis and Allies.

Just a bunch of like-minded people I guess.

I have played-tested rules with proxy miniatures (including Martian Empires with Napoleonics, ECW and LOR figures) but, again, they were all painted.

Mike

I've never seen people playing with unpainted minis at any big convention here in the US, either. I don't think that's the issue of this thread at all.

The question I would ask is; why is everybody so sure that somebody who is playing with unpainted figures is NEVER going to paint them? Some people won't ever paint their stuff, that's a given. But there is always a period in which a person has a new army that is all unpainted metal, and I don't think it unreasonable that the owner might want to play a few games before the six months or a year passes while he actually gets it painted. Sure, the game is far better when everything is finished, that's unarguable! But refusing to play with somebody while he is in the process of getting stuff done? That's unbelievably pigheaded and is definitely BAD for the hobby.

"I've never seen people playing with unpainted minis at any big convention here in the US, either. I don't think that's the issue of this thread at all."

Actually that is what spurred my original post. In the last year I have been to 5 gaming conventions and have seen this issue on the rise.

EE

[The question I would ask is; why is everybody so sure that somebody who is playing with unpainted figures is NEVER going to paint them? ]

To me, the question is moot. Again, in public games, there is only the here and now.

Look on the bright side: If the person never paints the army, and later unloads it, the next owner won't have to go to the trouble of stripping it! ;)

Oh, and have some 'tolerance' for somebody you meet the first time and who is playing with an unpainted army. Just enjoy the game. (That's why you're really there, right?) But if they consistently bring their unpainted army, then I could see that you'd have grounds to refuse to play them. (And if you are really lucky enough to get one that criticizes YOUR paintwork, well, keep that temper in check! ;)

Peace….

Given my druthers, I'd only play with painted figures. In fact, when I started, I managed to avoid unpainted ones — I was playing in a Napoleonics game, and I played as general for other people's forces until I got my (small) army painted.

The problem I face now is two-fold: (1) armies in the popular games take longer to paint; and (2) players expect to play with their own models.

For example, I could play Warmaster with completely painted armies — I have *five* of them. But players in this area have been so conditioned to playing with their own army that they won't touch them — except maybe to try a "test game". If it's a "real" game, they want their own figs.

This transcends the desire to play the game — if all they wanted to do was play the game, they'd accept the figs I offered them! They're assembled, they're painted, they win (at least, when I play them).

But that's not good enough! They have to own their own army, and there's where the eeee-ville enters the equation. They don't know how much effort goes into painting the army when they buy it — and they'll buy a huge one — and then they're intimidated by the effort once they know how.

So I try to teach them some short cuts: ways to make partially-painted figures look adequate on the table. (For the record: prime black, paint the faces, weapons, and bases.) I run painting nights to help schedule their time. But you've got to lean on 'em to keep 'em moving.

Known incentives to get painted armies on the table:

1) BFG's been mentioned — unpainted ships always had the lowest Leadership band in the fleet.

2) Blood Bowl — fully painted teams get a free re-roll.

No offense intended to anyone, apologies in advance, etc…

I'm a military modeller who wargames with my pieces. That's what I do. I don't take the unglued pieces of an Airfix/Revell/ESCI/UM/whatever tank and move them around in a trailing pile of 50 to 200 or so pieces. An unpainted tank or figure, for me, is the equivalent of this, I see no difference whatsoever. To me it's like playing hoop without a basketball, driving a car without an engine, or taking a date to a fancy restaurant and the only thing you can afford to order is a glass of water.

When I'm preparing a game, if I don't get the figures/AFVs I want in it painted, then the scenario is changed. It's the same as if I don't have the figures if they are not painted.

It's not a matter of I play so little nowadays (once last Easter and once last August for the past year) that I want things to be nice. It's that what wargaming is to me.

I personally think it's almost a different hobby from what some folks I've seen here discuss. Indeed, there's at least one person on this topic who derides people like me for using "delicate" models to wargame, so perhaps my conclusion is valid.

So – do unpainted miniatures hurt the hobby? They don't hurt my hobby, because by my definition, using unpainted miniatures (which, for me, is the same as pushing around small piles of unglued tank kits) is not part of my hobby.

Hopefully that doesn't offend anyone… It's my understanding of my hobby, ie, military modelling and wargaming, but is not intended to put my nose up at anyone else's hobby. But just like some might not be interested in a particular historical or SF genre, I'm not interested in playing with the genre of unpainted or partially painted miniatures.

Excelent post Tim! You expressed my views better then I did.

EE

My only objection would be that this is not your hobby or my hobby but how you prefer the hobby to be.

Sorry but for me refusing to play with someone for such a weak excuse as unpainted army is an act of elitism at least and hurts the hobby, if that is the normal then our diminishing numbers as wargamers (at least in some places of the globe) serves us well.

Tim: I was a modeler long before I was gamer, too. Maybe that's why I'm such an elitist snob.

Mr. Storm,

Perhaps you would good enough to explain why one side (painted) should defer to the other (unpainted). On what, pray tell, do you base your opinion that you occupy the moral high ground?

It would seem to me that the vast numbers of painted to unpainted figures would indicate that most people prefer paint over no paint. It would seem to me, since I've never seen unpainted figures in play at a convention, that the norm is painted, not unpainted.

Since standards are established by the majority (that's why they are called "standards"), and the majority deems that painted is proper and unpainted are improper (but is sometimes overlooked in certain circumstances).

Given this, it would seem to me that expecting painted miniatures would not be elitist at all. Rather, expectation of painted miniatures would be very conformist. Would it not be the case that not expecting painted miniatures would be odd?

This, Mr. Storm, is the crux of the issue. You argue that the expection of painted miniatures is elitist snobbery. Some people are having a difficult time comprehending your position because, you see, yours is the abberant positon. Look around you, Mr. Storm, and be objective. What is the norm? What is the average? What is the standard? Don't argue against an individual's opinion; that's just a single case. Survey the entire scene and you will quickly see that unpainted miniatures, as a rule, are undesirable and sometimes unacceptable.

Cosmotiger, I've been wargaming for 30 years and am apparently an elitist snob too.

I like to think of it as having Standards, and participating in the entire hobby of miniature wargaming.

EE

Having seen the effects of even just primer on the morale of my WAB army (and recognizing the easy maleability of my OG Rus for what it was: lead content), I consider paint to be an important part of the experience. BUT, I also recognize that not everyone sees it that way.

I ALSO recognize that play-buy-repeat is a powerful cycle that doesn't always have room for "paint" if the passion is to continue. Keeping beginners excited *without playing* while they paint a force is, frankly, a lot harder than it looks, particularly if they find painting difficult or intimidating.

I'd rather see a kid play wity an unpainted army then have the kids sent home because he ash not got a panted army to play with.

We have kids playing with unpainted armies. Every month a unit slowly gets painted up. We give encouragement and praise for the painted units and leave it at that. WE all start somewhere.

It is better for the hobby too if a kid is playing with an unpainted army. Much better than going home to play on the computer or play station because then he or she will not be coping rubbish about their unpainted army.

If you have been playing for a long time, I'd expect standards to be higher for yourself. But for crying out loud give the kids a break, If you started 30 years ago or more as I did, can you honestly say you washed, undercoated, and plainted all those airfix 1/72nds scale plastic miniatures plus based and varnished them as well.

Get the kids interested in the hobby and the games, the painting will come along at its own pace.

[But for crying out loud give the kids a break, If you started 30 years ago or more as I did, can you honestly say you washed, undercoated, and plainted all those airfix 1/72nds scale plastic miniatures plus based and varnished them as well.]

Actually, I was that snotty nosed kid clutching the end of the gaming table ant the back of the Little Tin Soldier Shop in Minneapolis Mn. It was the spectacles that the put on week in week out that got me hooked on miniatures gaming.

I _never_ remembered seeing unpainted miniatures in any of their games. They were very accepting of nips like myself. They worked whatever painted unit I brought into their games. (back then a pack of Garrison or Ral Partha miniatures was a week's allowance so my regiments were seldom bigger than 6-12 models). They were also easy about what I chose to paint. (For ages I would use my Heritage viking huscarls as "men-of-Bear" in our Tolkien big battles.) The rule was simple:

My miniatures had to be painted if they were going to be used with the grown-ups games.

I has always seemed perfectly natural to me.

"But for crying out loud give the kids a break, If you started 30 years ago or more as I did, can you honestly say you washed, undercoated, and plainted all those airfix 1/72nds scale plastic miniatures plus based and varnished them as well."

Yes they were. My father was a miniature wargamer, and the rules were pretty simple. If it wasn't painted it could not be used.

Kids do not need a break, they need to get off the video games and paint their miniatures. I have a stepson and he plays alot of video games instead of painting. He and his friend know that if it isn't painted it does not play. I have never turned him or any other Kid away from a game I just loan them a painted army.

It was a proud day for me at a local convention when my 13 year old stepson pointed out the unpainted miniatures and then says to me "Dad, what the heck is wrong with these guys. Stuff like this is going to ruin the hobby. It is a sad day when anyone will put miniatures on a table and not paint them."

EE

Ill explain myself, around me there were more unpainted army players than painted initially, when only painted armies rules emerged, the unpainted army players for one or another reason stopped coming because they couldn't enjoy their game till they spend a lot of their private time (of which they could have other plans) to have their army painted, a few managed to keep themselves hipped and finish their army most got lost in the process of these long month without having a game, so in the end the one fifth or so of us that were in the hobby for a long period and had painted armies remained.

I find playing with full painted armies in beautiful terrain a great experience, but playing with new faces is better.

There is an error in communication here that originates in different experiences, most of you supporting painted miniatures are from my assumption from either UK or US were wargames hobby is well entrenched and luxuries such as this (ie refusing to play against an opponent with unpainted army) are plausible, that unfortunately isn't the case with quite many parts of the glove, here my 16 years of constant wargaming are regarded as a rare event with most peoples averaging at five years or under, that alone in comparison to the 30 years mentioned above should indicate something.

That sort of attitude hurts the hobby and if it isn't obvious there were the hobby is entrenched and can create new players almost by itself, here it is obvious, having a player finding wargames and taking it up as his hobby is rare cutting his wings because he doesn't have an unpainted army is suicidal for the hobby.

As for conventions, remember there will go only those that live near them or are hardcore enough to travel to a different city/ state/ country or even continent to attend them, if you are going to such an endeavor you will certainly bring a painted army with you.

Anyway it wasn't my attention to call you elitist or snobs, but I think that the act of vetoing someone because of a minor deviation in what might or might not be the normal is such a thing.

I am not basing my assumption that in the debate of painted/ unpainted miniatures the unpainted miniatures wins on a moral high ground but on the single logical assumption that, if a player just want to play a game anyone stopping him from having fun with his hobby is wrong.

So to sum up your way of thinking is based because of the plethora of players locally giving you the luxury of enforcing such rules, that isn't the normal around here and probably not the normal in quite a few places in this wonderful planet we call earth.

Anyway that's how I base my assumptions on this subject.

Mr. Storm, et al,

"…if a player (unpainted. my word) just want to play a game anyone stopping him from having fun with his hobby is wrong."

Why?

Isn't it just as "wrong" for the player with unpainted minatures to stop the other guy from enjoying his hobby?

I don't understand.

The unpainted player has invested in some money figures and rules.

The painted player has done the same but has also invested hours upon hours of tedious painting or invested many more dollars/pounds/yen/etc. commisioning painting or buying painted figures.

If there is a dispute, who should give ground? Who has the most to loose?

I think that is why neck hair bristles when the suggestion is made that miniatures don't need to be painted. The painted miniatures side has much more invested. It's not that they are mean and dastardly individuals out to scar children's self-esteem for life. It's that when they invest so much and then face off against an unpainted army, they get that sinking feeling and begin asking themselves, "what was it all for?"

I think the painted side, by and large, has been pretty accommodating so far. There are ways to bring neophytes into the hobby with sacrificing standards. Several individuals have suggested that they would allowed "in progress" armies. I played with "loaner" DBA and DBM armies while I painted my own. When I reintroduced TSATF to club gaming, I pained enough mini's to play both sides. Same with LPE, POW and Hostile Aircraft. When I was being taught how to play Empire I used loaners. Later on when I taught NPOW, I returned the favor.

Yes, we have all been beginners. The difference is how you bring the beginners into the fold. I was NEVER refused participation in a game. If I didn't have miniatures for it, someone's would be borrowed or I would be given a unit to command. I received many invitations (which I took up) to visit peoples homes to shown how to paint, base, flock, make flags and research uniforms (I didn't have many Ospreys at the time).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that refusing to have unpainted lead on the table in NOT unreasonable or "wrong". There are ways to make newcomers feel welcome and part of the group without compromising standards. This DOES NOT have to be a question of choosing to alienate the grognards or the newbies.

Anyway that's how I base my opinons on this subject.

Ray, the difference is you're saying "No, you can't play." The unpainted player is just asking you to be accomodating of him. He's not asking you not to paint or not to play with your painted figures, just to let him play.

It all comes down to what you're doing this for. The context that the question was given in was playing a game. That's how some of us have answered it. You're insisting on answering it from a modelling perspective. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with being interested in the modelling aspect. But, we're talking about playing a game.

And, I'm sorry, but saying someone can't play or penalizing them is alot more alienating than asking someone just to be tolerant.

Sorry, but I don't think you're getting what I am saying. Why should the painted player be tolerant while the unpainted play need not. From what I've read so far, no one has told anyone that they can't play—just that they can't play with unpainted miniatures.

Alternatives have been suggested such as loaners and workshops. Some have even gone so far as to accept a partially painted army on the field as long as they are in progress.

I you ask me, the side that is insisting on painted miniatures is, on average, being very accommodating and is bending over backwards to help neophytes. By the same token, it patently wrong to ruin someone's hobby by insisting they accept unpainted armies in their games.

I think it's pretty obvious that if a club has a painted miniatures only rule, then that is group of like-minded people. Would I be right to join a sports car club and then insist that I drive my pick-up truck in thier rallies? I think not.

If you get an invitation to a costume party, is it okay to go without one, arguing you're there just for the party and not the costumes?