Unpainted Figures and Gamer's Etiquette
Ray Rangel
I read through the debate about the propriatety of unpainted armies on
the gaming table.
Instead of making a value judgement about the question, the people, or
the players on either side of this issue, let me tell you of my
experieinces and how they shaped the way I play.
Like many people I started out being introduced to miniature gaming
through GW. Fortunately my association with GW was less than a year.
However, during that breif period I learned that amongst the local
gamers, fielding the "Silver Horde" or a "Primered Platoon" was
perfectly acceptable. I never had to question why...it was obvious.
In 25mm (or larger) the amount of detail lavished on the figures by
the players who paint them is astounding. With White Dwarf on the one
hand and freinds who can reproduce those magificent works of art on
the other, the standards are astronomical. Thus, it takes so long to
paint *A* figure, no one would be playing if they had to have them all
done before they could begin. I must say tough, that every weekend
someone would bring in a their newly painted toy (myself included) and
show it off. That would light a fire under everyone (myself included)
to paint more, paint better, and paint faster. I seemed to me, in that
circle of gamers, that there were two distict hobbies. There was the
game and there was the figure painting. Niether seemed to intrude on
the other and everyone got along just fine.
In less than a year I realized that 40K is a not a good game and was
ready to move on. I had no where to go so I played on until a very
good friend by the name of Alex saw how frustrated I was getting and
suggested I visit this historical gaming group. Well that was the end
of my GW career. Alex had guided me to the light. I was now playing
game I really enjoyed. However I had a lot to learn about etiquette.
While I had been able to field the "Silver Legions" playing 40K, I
noticed that at the historical club meetings there was not a single
unpainted figure on the table. These guy were playing 700 point DBM
armies...hundreds and hundreds of 15mm figures swaming all over the
table! It was a glorius sight! I resolved then and there that I would
never field another unpainted army. From that point on, I have never
fielded an unpainted army. I must admit that this is much easier in
15mm than 25!
So you see, while I have my personal code, I understand and accept
players who for one reason or another feel compelled to field Private
Primer. To be sure, in some groups the painting standards are so high
that they nessessitate fielding unpained figures. Others frown on
anyone who is thoughtless enough to pit their Base Coated Battalions
against the figures they spend months readying for play.
As to the propriety of unpainted armies at historical conventions...I
don't remember seeing any. But I will say that it is up to the
covention organizers and sponsors to set the tone of the event. It is
up to them to decide the level of formality and set the tone of the
events. If one is intending to paricipate in a convention of
tournament and one has unpainted figures, contacting the event
coordinators is a very wise idea. While I haven't met anyone who would
refuse to let an unpainted army participate...if there is only one
unpainted army in the room, I suspect the owner would have that nasty
feeling of being the only person in Burmuda shorts in a room full of
tuxedos.
I guess it simply all boils down to doing in Rome as the Romans do.
Clay Smith
In article <356992d6...@news.texas.net>
xr...@texas.net (Ray Rangel) writes:
> Thus, it takes so long to
> paint *A* figure, no one would be playing if they had to have them all
> done before they could begin.
Ray....that is WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!! It takes the same amount
of time to paint a figure well as it does to paint it crappy. But in
any circumstances the figures MUST BE PAINTED!!!
No quarter.
Clay
Insert silly tag line here..
John M. Atkinson
On 1 Jun 1998 20:27:46 GMT, clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith)
wrote:
>Ray....that is WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!! It takes the same amount
>of time to paint a figure well as it does to paint it crappy. But in
>any circumstances the figures MUST BE PAINTED!!!
You know, I've never plonked anyone for simple narrow-mindedness, but
for the first time in my life,
*PLONK*
If this were rec.miniatures.historical, this bullshit would be
appropriate, but when it's a rec.games hierarchy group, this might
clue some people in that most people who post here care at least as
much about playing the game as they do painting. And we aren't a big
enough hobby to exclude anyone (except GW weenies).
John M. Atkinson
"When you send a man out with a gun, you create a policymaker.
When his ass is on the line, he will do whatever he needs to do.
"And if the implications of that bother you, the time to do
something about it is before you decide to send him out."
---David Drake,
Chris Keil
>If this were rec.miniatures.historical, this bullshit would be
>appropriate, but when it's a rec.games hierarchy group, this might
Umm... Johnny... it IS the historical NG... If you don't believe me, look
at all he people above bitching about the Dune threads...
>clue some people in that most people who post here care at least as
>much about playing the game as they do painting. And we aren't a big
>enough hobby to exclude anyone (except GW weenies).
I'm sure it's a fine idea to exclude GW gamers. It's not like there's a lot
of them or anything, or that some of them don't tire of GW's rules and head
on over to historicals and such... Just snub em and let em keep thinking
historical guys are stuffed shirts... Good idea, John.
John M. Atkinson
On 2 Jun 1998 05:05:00 -0700, "Chris Keil" <cjk...@primenet.com>
wrote:
>>If this were rec.miniatures.historical, this bullshit would be
>>appropriate, but when it's a rec.games hierarchy group, this might
>
>
>Umm... Johnny... it IS the historical NG... If you don't believe me, look
>at all he people above bitching about the Dune threads...
Note I left out the games. If it were just minis.historical, He'd be
slightly rational. As it is, he's somewhere between barking and
quietly drooling in a corner.
Clay Smith
In article <357d8c4d...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
jatk...@ix.you.know.what.to.remove.netcom.com (John M. Atkinson)
writes:
>
> If this were rec.miniatures.historical, this bullshit would be
> appropriate, but when it's a rec.games hierarchy group, this might
> clue some people in that most people who post here care at least as
> much about playing the game as they do painting. And we aren't a big
> enough hobby to exclude anyone (except GW weenies).
*ZOT!* You're in a different hobby than me. In my hobby everything is
painted. Always has been, always will be. No quarter....
Paul M. Brillantes
Clay Smith wrote:
Clay,
I just recently purchased a few hundred Old Glory British foot and
a bag of British Horse Artillery. This is my first purchase as I am the
quintessential newbie to this hobby. I have made the decision to paint
them all before I use them since I have the good fortune to have found a
group that will allow me to play with some of their figures until I am
done. That is my decision, but I do not feel that I have the right to
force this opinion on others. Nor, I must point out, do you!
I just subscribed to this news group today and have spend the last
four hours reading the 702 posts that are current, and I must say that
yours is the only voice on this group lacking in reason. You have one tune
and you continue to sing it badly. You seem steeled against not change
itself but against the mere possibility of change. For this I am sad,
since at one point you stated that you were bringing some of the players in
your area over to the pro-painting side of this discussion. Note I say
discussion not argument for that is what it should be. I can only hope
that these new disciples of paint are not as fanatic in their mindset as
you, since it seems that this can only cause a schism in what should be one
group.
Your stance may seem stoic to you, but it has the same appearance
of the hard line communists continuing to spout the party line as the
Berlin wall and the rest of their system comes down around them. I find
this hard to say since I do in essence agree with you that figures should
be painted before they are sent out onto the field of battle. I urge you
to consider your words carefully before you next post. I am sure that with
your conviction to your cause, you will gain much more by carefully
considered convincing than you ever will by alarmist pronunciations of "No
Quarter!"
Paul Brillantes
Thomas Whitten
Why do people keep insisting on defining the hobby as 'my way is the only
way?' What if someone aggressively told you steak should be eaten rare and you
like it well done. Or someone told you you need to have an elaborately decorated
lawn and you like simple, neatly cut grass?
The thing is, different people will get different things from this hobby. For
example, I could read about Agincourt and then break out my 100 Year war minis and
refight the battle - all without a single drop of paint. Of course since this is
'historical gaming' I should paint those minis, slap some mud down on the table for
the battle and try and contract dysentery cause otherwise I'm not involving myself
in the hobby.
Some will continue to define the hobby by their own narrow standards but that
will never change the fact that other people will continue to enjoy the hobby
outside of those standards (regardless of all the ranting.)
t.w.
Thomas Whitten
Edward J. Lizak wrote:
>
>
> No paint, no play (unless your into warhammer, etc.) The paint is
> what separates us from the rest of animals (Warhammer again).
>
Weird, my 100 Year War English are free fight without a coat of paint. The freedom is what
separates us from the Fascists and the Communists
T.W.
Thomas Whitten
Paul M. Brillantes wrote:
<snip>
>
>
> Your stance may seem stoic to you, but it has the same appearance
> of the hard line communists continuing to spout the party line as the
> Berlin wall and the rest of their system comes down around them. I find
> this hard to say since I do in essence agree with you that figures should
> be painted before they are sent out onto the field of battle. I urge you
> to consider your words carefully before you next post. I am sure that with
> your conviction to your cause, you will gain much more by carefully
> considered convincing than you ever will by alarmist pronunciations of "No
> Quarter!"
>
> Paul Brillantes
Eloquently written post. I wish more could have as open a mind as yourself.
Hope your foray into this hobby is joyous one. And good luck on getting your
new figs painted. I was making some good progress on painting my New Kingdom
Egyptians but I'm turned off the whole painting thing now. Perhaps I'll come
back to it at a later date but till then I'll continue to play.
T.W.
Christopher Lee Frame
> On 1 Jun 1998 20:27:46 GMT, clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith)
> wrote:
>
> >Ray....that is WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!! It takes the same amount
> >of time to paint a figure well as it does to paint it crappy. But in
> >any circumstances the figures MUST BE PAINTED!!!
I disagree that figures HAVE to be painted. I'd wargame with anyone that
showed up with figures - painted or unpainted. Actually, I've played
wonderful wargames (Napoleonic) with just paper miniatures from Avalon
Hill's Napoleon's Battles wargames (and if some absent minded, overweight
gamer steps on the paper miniature counters, they don't CRUNCH and no one
WHINES - and it seems to be the overweight guys that normally crunch stuff
up - 1/72nd scale plastic cav don't stand a chance against 250 lbs of
angry wargamer).
I have seen some extremely impressive paint jobs, but I go to wargame, not
admire the figures. For those of you that INSIST on playing only with
people that paint figures, that's fine, but I'm more open minded. I just
don't have the time to sit and paint figures, nor am I willing to pay
someone to do it for me.
Generally, I use figures painted by OTHER people (alot of THEM insist that
figures MUST BE PAINTED or you ain't playin' in my sandbox) and return
them after wargaming since alot of the people I wargame with have more
figures than they can possibly manage in a single wargame.
Christopher Lee Frame
Christopher Lee Frame
Edward J. Lizak wrote:
> No paint, no play (unless your into warhammer, etc.) The paint is
> what separates us from the rest of animals (Warhammer again).
I've seen Warhammer stuff painted just as well as historical miniatures, although I've only
played Warhammer once. Personally, I think there should be wargames where one side is painted
and the other side is unpainted - that is the ONLY way to settle this problem. The losers
figures get destroyed.
CFrame
Christopher Lee Frame
TYGHOCK wrote:
> 1. NB vs. Empire - With the excitement and color of the Renaissance, who cares
> about Napoleonics, anyway? non-issue.
>
> 2. 15 vs. 25 - Only 25mm is acceptable. Wimps. Next.
METRIC?!? No millimeters. Millimeters are for neanderthals. 1/72nd scale, now
that is for REAL historical wargamers.
> 3. Plastic vs. metal - plastic's for wrapping garbage. Next.
Yes, garbage such as metal figures. Incidently, if your figures don't have to AT
LEAST five extra parts bonded to them, you can't play in my wargames, I don't
wargame with people that ONLY paint their figures, you have to build them also
(people that use figures that come assembled are known cheats anyway I read it in
the rulebook).
> As for unpainted minis - OK to playtest rules, but not to play - possible
> exception for newbie showing gradual increase in painted troops.
So what is the line between playtesting and playing? Sort of like the "recon in
force" problem when ordered not to attack. I've been playtesting rules for YEARS!
> - TYGHOCK (toungue firmly in cheek..)
Get you "toungue" (whatever the heck that is) away from that cheek and roll the
dice, I just waited half an hour for you to move all your damn figures, so get to
it.
CFrame
Christopher Lee Frame
Below is the best answer. I have painted some figures just to play with
people that insist on having figures painted, but I don't care either
way. Of course if you voted for Clinton, I'll never play with you.
CFrame
Conor O'Dowd wrote:
> I can't believe what I'm seeing here!!!
>
> Surely the only worthwhile answer is another question (the Irish way!)
>
> "Does your opponent mind?"
>
> Now let's get back to the serious stuff.
Christopher Lee Frame
Ray Rangel wrote:
> No you have it wrong. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that everyone
> who insists on painted minis (and I count myself in that group!)
> started in this hobby with this a one of the "unwritten rules" or
> "codes of conduct" or "good sportsmanship". What ever you want to call
> it, that's what most us were taught by the people who nurtured us in
> the hobby. "My way"? I think not! It is THE WAY!
And if THE WAY was that the losers of the wargame jump off a bridge at the end of the
wargame would you do it? I've had this discussion with people that insisted on painted
miniatures in person and they all said, "That's they way we do it". It is like people
that would argue about putting on BOTH socks before putting on a boot or putting on ONE
sock and then immediately thereafter ONE boot, followed by the other sock and THEN the
last boot.
Twaddle.
BUT, if you actually wargame well, I would paint minis to play in the group, but prefer
to play and not paint.
> I'm sure I can give you references to people who will recommend
> several board games if you don't want to paint. By the way...I've been
> wondering...if you don't want to paint them, why buy them? Board
> gaming is a MUCH cheaper hobby. Perhaps it's too much trouble to punch
> out all the little chits?
Some people would just consider your miniatures as TOYS. The little boys with their
little toys. The real military use counters, not toys anymore (when they don't do
computer simulations). When I was in the army we had transparent counters for the maps,
not miniatures. Of course, I realize that miniatures are more than just toys (at least
I believe so), but your whining attitude demanded that I bring it up. I suggest only
YOUR miniatures are TOYS, and other people with more advanced social skills have
HISTORICAL MINIATURES.
I bet your toys are painted incorrectly anyway.
CF
Christopher Lee Frame
Avatar wrote:
> : A mini marks the place where a unit is. Unless you only do 1:1
> : skirmish, all minis are representative.
>
> The point is that a mini *looks* like what it represents, whil a flat,
> square piece of cardboard does not.
Yep, every photograph I've seen of warfare has alot of people in EXACTLY the
same pose EQUALLY spaced in small groups.
I just love the look of miniatures in mass on a battlefield, but they HARDLY
look realistic. Of course, I must admit they look alot MORE realistic than a
cardboard chit or counter. AND if painted they look more realistic than
unpainted, so those I can see those hot on realism of LOOKS insisting on
painting, etc.
Everything is a matter of degree, more realism or whatever.
Just have a good time wargaming.
CF
Christopher Lee Frame
Sorry Clay it isn't YOUR hobby it is A hobby. I DO think that there are
more historical wargamers that paint figures than those that don't, but in
my opinion you are only dooming the hobby to extinction by limiting what can
be used at conventions or gaming meets (as you sort of point out below with
the gaming at the table next to me comment).
I can only reply with, "Paint this". Or were you just joking?
CFrame
Clay Smith wrote:
> Unpainted figures becoming acceptable on the table is a CANCER to this
> hobby. If it costs the hobby some recruits - then FINE. This hobby
> is for people who love history so much that they want to recreate it in
> miniature. Lot's of people (like ME) spend years to put a project
> together, and I'll be damned if the table next to me at a convention is
> going to have unpainted figures on it. At least while I have anything
> to say about it (and sometimes I do...)
Christopher Lee Frame
Jay wrote:
> And an individual who refuses to paint, or play with offered painted
> figs, will soon be snubbed. Sorry if that sounds extremist, but anyone
> who absolutely refuses to play with anything other than unpainted lead
> (even if it's for some silly idea like it's his own), doesn't belong
> in the typical minis group. His opinion is no more valid than ours,
> but it's also our choice of association.
I agree that if someone shows up with unpainted stuff and someone offers to let them use
painted stuff they should use it (that's what I do because some of the grognards insist on
painted only).
But in addition to painting, do you HAVE to play on some sort of realistic terrain also? We
play on carpet and I hate it because it looks stupid but I'd rather play on carpet than not
play at all.
CF
Christopher Lee Frame
Actually, I'd have no problem playing with an "intolerant" guy like you (as you
define yourself at the bottom of the message). I understand that conventions
rules are different than home rules, but everything changes.
Dean Klein wrote:
> 1) I am intolerant of gamers who don't bathe yet insist on standing next to
> me.
So am I, and I would politely point it out to those (I have the same problems
with people at Penn State University that have BO).
> 2) I am intolerant of gamers who argue with the game organizers over
> trivial bullshit.
Okay, no problem there.
> 3) I am intolerant of people who like to wear their "uniforms" to
> conventions.
I never understood the BAD side to this. Please explain if you have the time.
I think it would be neat to see Civil War uniforms etc.
> 4) I am intolerant of sore losers.
Isn't everyone, except the sore losers themselves?
> 5) I am intolerant of unpainted armies, especially in tournament games.
I'm not.
> 6) I am intolerant of people who criticize the paint jobs of players who
> DID put forth the effort to paint their armies.
If they are NASTY in being critical then I am against it, but constructive
criticism is important - that is how you learn.
> 7) I am intolerant of people who fail to grasp societal norms of behavior
> when out in public.
This is a tough one. Something normal for you is not normal for others, but
generally I like a peaceful battle as opposed to ranting and raving.
> 8) I am intolerant of having my wife look at me funny when some guy named
> "Wolfsblood" (or any other fantasy pseudonym) wearing his Special Forces
> T-shirt, asks me if I want to play a game of "Teenagers from Outer Space"
> with him over at his mom's house. (And I don't care HOW tactically
> proficeint he is)
Hey, just because you can't play "Teenagers from Outer Space" isn't MY problem.
Do you have to paint miniatures for THAT too?!? Ha!
> 9) I am intolerant of being lumped into the same category as 1-8 simply
> because I like to play historical miniatures.
I try to judge people individually (whether they paint their armies or not).
Some will be cool and others losers.
> Bottom Line: When you go to a convention that is open to the general
> public, you're not at home in your underwear anymore.
I wear underwear to conventions just like I wear it at home, since you brought
it up.
Bottom Line: You've probably gone to alot more conventions to game than I have,
but if I were to run a game, I would not require figs to be painted. I have yet
to run a game at a con, but I have played a few.
> That means painted lead, nice manners, good personal hygiene, and
> a POSITIVE image portrayed. Because, if you screw that up, you not only
> make yourself look stupid, but me and everyone else associated with the
> hobby as well. And that is something that I will not tolerate. By the way,
> did I mention good personal hygiene.
Oh yes, you DID mention personal hygiene.
> P.S. And don't bother writing me to tell me that you'd never want to play
> with an "intolerant" guy like me. I'll still sleep quite well.
Again, I'd play with or against you without a problem. I've played with people
that ABSOLUTELY INSIST on minis being painted and I've used their minis and had
a great time. I just don't have the time to paint them, nor do I want to make
the time.
CFrame
Christopher Lee Frame
Yes, I generally use plastic for figures (1/72), but metal for armor (1/285). I have
ALOT of problems with paint sticking and so do the grognards that I've played with and
against that insist on painting their thousand 1/72nd scale plastic figures (they get
worse looking after every game).
Maybe if I got some 1/72 metal stuff I would be more moved to paint it. I DO like
painting my 1/285th microarmor and it wears well.
Okay, I can see why people might say plastic sucks, but it is cheap up front (in the
long run it may not be).
Happy Wargaming,
CFrame
Hubert Klak wrote:
> From this comments it seems to me that you are using plastic figures. I
> have alwas one basic problem with them - make a paint staing on model.
> Are you using any special primer, or any other method to solve a problem
> with droping of paint?
> I agree that plastic is very usfull for conversions, but it is terrible
> for painting.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Hubert
Christopher Lee Frame
Of course a clear coat over the figures after painting is complete will keep them "finished"
for a longer period of time. Anyone have experience with that? I have a bunch of Dilger's
Artillery units from the American Civil War that I want to protect (yes they are plastic
1/72 figures - I painted them while waiting for information to download from the net).
CFrame
DrumLund
I couldn't agree with Clay more. I have never seen anyone attempt to play with
unpainted historical miniatures in my 26 years associated with this hobby. I
can't tell you how many times I have feverishly painted troops as preparation
for a big game. Part of the hobby is the research of the units, uniforms, and
organizations. This is historical gaming.
Jon Lundberg>Subject: Re: Unpainted Figures and Gamer's Etiquette
>From: "Paul M. Brillantes" <pmb...@usit.net>
>Date: Tue, Jun 2, 1998 17:00 EDT
>Message-id: <357467E1...@usit.net>
>
>Clay Smith wrote:
>
>> In article <357d8c4d...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
>> jatk...@ix.you.know.what.to.remove.netcom.com (John M. Atkinson)
>> writes:
>>
>> >
>> > If this were rec.miniatures.historical, this bullshit would be
>> > appropriate, but when it's a rec.games hierarchy group, this might
>> > clue some people in that most people who post here care at least as
>> > much about playing the game as they do painting. And we aren't a big
>> > enough hobby to exclude anyone (except GW weenies).
>>
>> *ZOT!* You're in a different hobby than me. In my hobby everything is
>> painted. Always has been, always will be. No quarter....
>>
>>
>> Insert silly tag line here..
>
>
> I just recently purchased a few hundred Old Glory British foot and
>a bag of British Horse Artillery. This is my first purchase as I am the
>quintessential newbie to this hobby. I have made the decision to paint
>them all before I use them since I have the good fortune to have found a
>group that will allow me to play with some of their figures until I am
>done. That is my decision, but I do not feel that I have the right to
>force this opinion on others. Nor, I must point out, do you!
>
> I just subscribed to this news group today and have spend the last
>four hours reading the 702 posts that are current, and I must say that
>yours is the only voice on this group lacking in reason. You have one tune
>and you continue to sing it badly. You seem steeled against not change
>itself but against the mere possibility of change. For this I am sad,
>since at one point you stated that you were bringing some of the players in
>your area over to the pro-painting side of this discussion. Note I say
>discussion not argument for that is what it should be. I can only hope
>that these new disciples of paint are not as fanatic in their mindset as
>you, since it seems that this can only cause a schism in what should be one
>group.
>
>of the hard line communists continuing to spout the party line as the
>Berlin wall and the rest of their system comes down around them. I find
>this hard to say since I do in essence agree with you that figures should
>be painted before they are sent out onto the field of battle. I urge you
>to consider your words carefully before you next post. I am sure that with
>your conviction to your cause, you will gain much more by carefully
>considered convincing than you ever will by alarmist pronunciations of "No
>Quarter!"
>
>Paul Brillantes
>
>
Jon Lundberg
Edward J. Lizak
On 03 Jun 1998 00:15:11 GMT, drum...@aol.com (DrumLund) wrote:
>I couldn't agree with Clay more. I have never seen anyone attempt to play with
>unpainted historical miniatures in my 26 years associated with this hobby. I
>can't tell you how many times I have feverishly painted troops as preparation
>for a big game. Part of the hobby is the research of the units, uniforms, and
>organizations. This is historical gaming.
>Jon Lundberg>Subject: Re: Unpainted Figures and Gamer's Etiquette
No paint, no play (unless your into warhammer, etc.) The paint is
what separates us from the rest of animals (Warhammer again).
>>From: "Paul M. Brillantes" <pmb...@usit.net>
>>Date: Tue, Jun 2, 1998 17:00 EDT
>>Message-id: <357467E1...@usit.net>
>> I can only hope that these new disciples of paint are not as fanatic in their mindset as
>>you, since it seems that this can only cause a schism in what should be one
>>group.
>>
Wait until someone asks about NB versus Empire (or 15's vs. 25's, or
plastic vs. metal, it goes on and on). He will see that this group is
full of "schism"
-EJL
TYGHOCK
>Wait until someone asks about NB versus Empire (or 15's vs. >25's, or plastic
vs. metal, it goes on and on). He will see that this >group is full of
No schisms, really....
1. NB vs. Empire - With the excitement and color of the Renaissance, who cares
about Napoleonics, anyway? non-issue.
2. 15 vs. 25 - Only 25mm is acceptable. Wimps. Next.
3. Plastic vs. metal - plastic's for wrapping garbage. Next.
Universal agreement on every point - see?
As for unpainted minis - OK to playtest rules, but not to play - possible
exception for newbie showing gradual increase in painted troops.
- TYGHOCK (toungue firmly in cheek..)
Bill Smith
clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith) wrote:
>In article <356992d6...@news.texas.net>
>xr...@texas.net (Ray Rangel) writes:
>> Thus, it takes so long to
>> paint *A* figure, no one would be playing if they had to have them all
>> done before they could begin.
>Ray....that is WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!! It takes the same amount
>of time to paint a figure well as it does to paint it crappy. But in
>any circumstances the figures MUST BE PAINTED!!!
Hmmmm, here I have to disagree. I can paint a figure (I'm presently
doing OG's 25mm Highland Infantry and Command) crappily in about 15
minutes. However, to paint it well, it takes about two days per
figure. I find I do my best work in short bursts--so I work one area
of the figure, leave it and come back later.
I'll go back to lurking now ;)
Regards,
Bill
Ray Rangel
On 1 Jun 1998 20:27:46 GMT, clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith)
wrote:
>In article <356992d6...@news.texas.net>
>xr...@texas.net (Ray Rangel) writes:
>
>
>> Thus, it takes so long to
>> paint *A* figure, no one would be playing if they had to have them all
>> done before they could begin.
>
>Ray....that is WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!! It takes the same amount
>of time to paint a figure well as it does to paint it crappy. But in
>any circumstances the figures MUST BE PAINTED!!!
>
I think if you reread the text of my post, you will see that I was
refering to the GW players trying paint to White Dwarf standards. That
is why in many GW groups, unpainted figures abound.
I whole heartly agree with your stand on unpainted minis on the game
table.
I think your view of painting is simplistic though. I paint fairly
quickly and paint faily well. But then I get a lot of practice. It
does NOT take everyone the same amount of time to paint well as badly.
Some people who don't have as much practice as you of me will take
much longer to paint well. But I will lend them the troops that they
need so that they can take their time and learn to do it to their own
satisfaction.
Ray Rangel
> Why do people keep insisting on defining the hobby as 'my way is the only
>way?' What if someone aggressively told you steak should be eaten rare and you
>like it well done. Or someone told you you need to have an elaborately decorated
>lawn and you like simple, neatly cut grass?
>
No you have it wrong. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that everyone
who insists on painted minis (and I count myself in that group!)
started in this hobby with this a one of the "unwritten rules" or
"codes of conduct" or "good sportsmanship". What ever you want to call
it, that's what most us were taught by the people who nurtured us in
the hobby. "My way"? I think not! It is THE WAY!
> The thing is, different people will get different things from this hobby. For
>example, I could read about Agincourt and then break out my 100 Year war minis and
>refight the battle - all without a single drop of paint. Of course since this is
>'historical gaming' I should paint those minis, slap some mud down on the table for
>the battle and try and contract dysentery cause otherwise I'm not involving myself
>in the hobby.
I'm sure I can give you references to people who will recommend
several board games if you don't want to paint. By the way...I've been
wondering...if you don't want to paint them, why buy them? Board
gaming is a MUCH cheaper hobby. Perhaps it's too much trouble to punch
out all the little chits?
> Some will continue to define the hobby by their own narrow standards but that
>will never change the fact that other people will continue to enjoy the hobby
>outside of those standards (regardless of all the ranting.)
>
It is a collective standard on which Clay, myself, and several others
have taken a stand. It is a pooling of gaming experience and many
years of gaming etiquette. These are not isolated standards created by
a few individuals. Rather it is a genleman's code that has been passed
from player to player and generation to generation.
>t.w.
>
>
Stephen Holmes
TYGHOCK wrote:
> >Wait until someone asks about NB versus Empire (or 15's vs. >25's, or plastic
> vs. metal, it goes on and on). He will see that this >group is full of
> "schism".
>
> No schisms, really....
>
> 1. NB vs. Empire - With the excitement and color of the Renaissance, who cares
> about Napoleonics, anyway? non-issue.
Let me see.
Lt Col. Pinkerton Smythe's troope of foote.
Colours Buff, Hats Buff, Skin - Muddy Buff.
Against
Col. Fotherington Smeek's troope of foote.
Colours Buff, Hats Buff, Skin - Muddy Buff.
The good bit about the renaissance was all the sculptors and painters (Not in the
mimis line in those Days - suggest a totally separate line for why "David" is
compatible with the latest 25mm offerings).
Warfare took a big step backwards.
>
>
> 2. 15 vs. 25 - Only 25mm is acceptable. Wimps. Next.
>
But would that be "28mm" 25s, "Old" 25s or "New" 25's.At leat two of the above are
totally unacceptable.
> 3. Plastic vs. metal - plastic's for wrapping garbage. Next.
>
Most obvious case of a "tinman" arguent I've ever seen.
> Universal agreement on every point - see?
>
> As for unpainted minis - OK to playtest rules, but not to play - possible
> exception for newbie showing gradual increase in painted troops.
>
> - TYGHOCK (toungue firmly in cheek..)
Likewise
John M. Atkinson
>The good bit about the renaissance was all the sculptors and painters (Not in the
>mimis line in those Days - suggest a totally separate line for why "David" is
>compatible with the latest 25mm offerings).
>
>Warfare took a big step backwards.
Backwards? Medieval warfare: Two armies line up, go straight at
eachother. Generally whichever side thought to do a little
battlefield preparation (see: Courtrai) wins. It's pretty much
predetermined. Renaissance shows a bit more finesse--and besides, who
doesn't like pikes and matchlocks?
Shadowmage
>snip
>No paint, no play (unless your into warhammer, etc.) The paint is
>what separates us from the rest of animals (Warhammer again).
>
>
Hate to tell you but there are just as many Warhammer players who get upset
when people play with them with unpainted armies. And many who refuse to
play with unpainted figures and their official tournaments do not allow
unpainted armies. And the paint jobs are part of the tournament and they get
points for the best painted army.
Avatar
Ray Rangel (xr...@texas.net) wrote:
:
: No you have it wrong. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that everyone
: who insists on painted minis (and I count myself in that group!)
: started in this hobby with this a one of the "unwritten rules" or
: "codes of conduct" or "good sportsmanship". What ever you want to call
: it, that's what most us were taught by the people who nurtured us in
: the hobby. "My way"? I think not! It is THE WAY!
No its *your* way....I have met plenty of people in the last 20 years who
are just thrilled to find others who share a common interest in the same
historical periods and want to recreate some of the battles from that
period. They have all viewed the painting as secondary, because if you
know the history you know what the uniforms look like and they were more
interested in recreating the historical battles than bitching about
unpainted or partially painted armies. I joined this hobby, predominantly
for the history all those years ago. I eventually found miniature
painting as a hobby in its own and crossed the two over a bit, but never
got stuck on the *you must paint* band wagon. I like painting, so it was
not an issue, but I certainly know what it is like to spend my time doing
things I don't enjoy so don't really care if someone I play against
doesn't like painting so does it incredibly slowly if not at all. Its
just never been an issue for me or any of the groups I have played in.
: I'm sure I can give you references to people who will recommend
: several board games if you don't want to paint. By the way...I've been
: wondering...if you don't want to paint them, why buy them? Board
: gaming is a MUCH cheaper hobby. Perhaps it's too much trouble to punch
: out all the little chits?
:
THere it is again. What is it with people who keep coming back to this
*if you don't paint play boardgames* bullshit?? A cardboard counter is
not even remotely similar to a mini except that it marks a place where the
unit is. After playing with minis, painted or not, counter based games
just don't cut it. As long as you are going to make ridiculous statements
like this how about this : As long as you require every one to have
painted miniatures why don't *you* pay to have someone else's minis
painted for them?? Now you're probably thinking, *well they're not my
minis* which is exactly what you should be thinking...you should also be
thinking that when you are pressuring someone into painting all their
minis before your would give them the time of day too....
: It is a collective standard on which Clay, myself, and several others
: have taken a stand. It is a pooling of gaming experience and many
: years of gaming etiquette. These are not isolated standards created by
: a few individuals. Rather it is a genleman's code that has been passed
: from player to player and generation to generation.
:
I don't know. I don't see too much gentlemanly conduct in laughing people
out of groups for having poorly painted or unpainted minis. I also see
nothing gentlmanly about ridiculing someone playing a game with aonother
playing because one of those players has unpainted minis. You seem to
think that *you* define what is right and not right in the hobby. Well,
you don't. Get a handle on that. Get a grip and move on. I can probably
cite just as many examples of groups and people that never pushed the
*must have everything painted* as you can show examples of those who did
push the *everything has to be painted* angle. There are as many
different ways to play these games as there players out there. Sure, you
and Clay and others may have been introduced to the hobby by those with
similar requirements and expectations, which, IMO, has set an annoying
precendent for some new players. I've taught and played with many new
players who tried to join a group and were thrown out because they didn't
have fully painted armies immediately after starting the hobby...They were
ready to abandon everything...What a bloody waste that is.....
You are certainly free to play your games as you see fit, but be aware
that otyhers are allow to play their games as they see fit....
Avatar
Clay Smith
In article <199806030404...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
tyg...@aol.com (TYGHOCK) writes:
> 2. 15 vs. 25 - Only 25mm is acceptable. Wimps. Next.
>
I agree! 25mm is the best!
> 3. Plastic vs. metal - plastic's for wrapping garbage. Next.
>
Agree! And not just 'metal', but LEAD. PEE-YOO-TUR sucks...
Clay Smith
In article <6l2iog$msa$2...@winter.news.erols.com>
bsmi...@erols.com (Bill Smith) writes:
> Hmmmm, here I have to disagree. I can paint a figure (I'm presently
> doing OG's 25mm Highland Infantry and Command) crappily in about 15
> minutes. However, to paint it well, it takes about two days per
> figure. I find I do my best work in short bursts--so I work one area
> of the figure, leave it and come back later.
You're taking WAY WAY too long to paint.......use a bigger brush.
Clay Smith
In article <3574adba...@news.one.net>
e...@one.net.remove (Edward J. Lizak) writes:
> Wait until someone asks about NB versus Empire (or 15's vs. 25's, or
> plastic vs. metal, it goes on and on). He will see that this group is
> full of "schism"
Do you guys want to discuss NB? I am *THE* standard bearer for the "I
hate Napoleon's Battles" side....everyone who's been here for years
will remember me....
Clay Smith
In article <3574d6c1...@news.texas.net>
xr...@texas.net (Ray Rangel) writes:
> I think your view of painting is simplistic though. I paint fairly
> quickly and paint faily well. But then I get a lot of practice. It
> does NOT take everyone the same amount of time to paint well as badly.
All it takes is changing a few techniques. For example, stop trying to
'Paint by numbers'. Prime the figure white, use a larger brush, and
thin the paint a little. And learn to drybrush and paint faces. Good
basing techniques help out too..
You've seen my stuff.
Clay Smith
In article <3574d991...@news.texas.net>
xr...@texas.net (Ray Rangel) writes:
> No you have it wrong. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that everyone
> who insists on painted minis (and I count myself in that group!)
> started in this hobby with this a one of the "unwritten rules" or
> "codes of conduct" or "good sportsmanship". What ever you want to call
> it, that's what most us were taught by the people who nurtured us in
> the hobby. "My way"? I think not! It is THE WAY!
Way to go RAY!! It's the WAY!!! (It's the WAY RAY! - our battle
cry!)
Unpainted figures becoming acceptable on the table is a CANCER to this
hobby. If it costs the hobby some recruits - then FINE. This hobby
is for people who love history so much that they want to recreate it in
miniature. Lot's of people (like ME) spend years to put a project
together, and I'll be damned if the table next to me at a convention is
going to have unpainted figures on it. At least while I have anything
to say about it (and sometimes I do...)
>
> It is a collective standard on which Clay, myself, and several others
> have taken a stand.
That's exactly what this is - a STAND. On the Warhammer group I was
tolerant. Not here. Not with this hobby, that I love so much. I
would rather play Napoleon's Battles every week than play any game with
unpainted figures!
Thomas Whitten
> I'm sure I can give you references to people who will recommend
> several board games if you don't want to paint.
>
> By the way...I've been
> wondering...if you don't want to paint them, why buy them?
>
discussion because some self-righteous painters try and limit a persons freedom with
respect to miniature gaming. Truth is that those same self-righteous painters have zero
power to do so but it is fun to tell them so.
> Board gaming is a MUCH cheaper hobby.
>
My motives for buying lead are my own business.
> Perhaps it's too much trouble to punch
> out all the little chits?
>
For some games I'm fine because a lot of the chits came apart during shipping. But
we had a problem with Advanced Third Reich and had to stop the game because not enough
of the chits had come apart. Haven't played Advanced TR since.
> genleman's code that has been passed
> from player to player and generation to generation.
Gentlemen's' code subsection P:
If approached by a player whose army is unpainted:
a) Offer to loan one of your armies which is already painted for play.
b) If after a) player stills prefers to use their own unpainted army play them
anyway.
c) After the game show them painted minis and offer help them get started in
painting.
d) If they don't want to paint accept that it is their personal choice and
freedom.
e) Realize your opinion is no more valid than theirs.
......
There is nothing courteous about mocking out a persons preference not to paint. It
is the same as someone walking up to you and telling you what a waste of time it was for
you to paint all your minis.
> >t.w.
> >
> >
Paul Ohtonen
I'm new to the Nepoleonics historical miniature battles and have only
tried one gaming system, Napoleons's Battles. Do you have a problem with
Napoleons's Battles? If there is a problem with it, which gaming system
do you prefer to use? Which Nepoleonic gaming system is the most
popular?
Paul
Clay Smith
In article <357583...@pobox.srl.ford.com>
Paul Ohtonen <poht...@pobox.srl.ford.com> writes:
> I'm new to the Nepoleonics historical miniature battles and have only
> tried one gaming system, Napoleons's Battles. Do you have a problem with
> Napoleons's Battles? If there is a problem with it, which gaming system
> do you prefer to use? Which Nepoleonic gaming system is the most
> popular?
>
> Paul
Paul, in all fairness to the discuss, and to you being new to the game,
I'll avoid ranting against NB. I just don't think its a good set of
Napoleonic's rules...we can get into that tornado on another thread.
I play it from time to time - and ALWAYS with painted figures.
Stephen Graham
In article <3574d991...@news.texas.net>,
Ray Rangel <xr...@texas.net> wrote:
>No you have it wrong. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that everyone
>who insists on painted minis (and I count myself in that group!)
>started in this hobby with this a one of the "unwritten rules" or
>"codes of conduct" or "good sportsmanship". What ever you want to call
>it, that's what most us were taught by the people who nurtured us in
>the hobby. "My way"? I think not! It is THE WAY!
One of the problems here may be the definition of the hobby. This has
been discussed endlessly here and elsewhere. But for some of us, the
hobby is wargaming and what you use to wargame is pretty irrelevant:
miniatures, boardgames, computers or whatever. There aren't all that
many of us to begin with. (Best guess figures show that we are about
0.01% of the US population.)
One of the danger signs: the number of hobby shops that carry historical
miniatures and/or boardgames is dropping rapidly.
Do we really want to alienate anyone who is interested in the general
hobby?
>I'm sure I can give you references to people who will recommend
>several board games if you don't want to paint. By the way...I've been
>wondering...if you don't want to paint them, why buy them? Board
>gaming is a MUCH cheaper hobby. Perhaps it's too much trouble to punch
>out all the little chits?
Boardgaming and miniatures are probably equally expensive. Remember, the
average wargame costs over $40 now.
--
Stephen Graham
gra...@ee.washington.edu
gra...@eskimo.com
Bill Armintrout
On Wed, 03 Jun 1998 07:22:41 GMT, xr...@texas.net (Ray Rangel) wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Jun 1998 22:08:56 -0500, Thomas Whitten
><whi...@nospam.cae.wisc.edu> wrote:
>> The thing is, different people will get different things from this hobby. For
>>example, I could read about Agincourt and then break out my 100 Year war minis and
>>refight the battle - all without a single drop of paint. Of course since this is
>>'historical gaming' I should paint those minis, slap some mud down on the table for
>>the battle and try and contract dysentery cause otherwise I'm not involving myself
>>in the hobby.
>It is a collective standard on which Clay, myself, and several others
>have taken a stand. It is a pooling of gaming experience and many
>years of gaming etiquette. These are not isolated standards created by
>a few individuals. Rather it is a genleman's code that has been passed
>from player to player and generation to generation.
Have you considered that the pressure to play only with painted
miniatures could have a tendency to lead to hastily painted (poorly
painted) figures?
I have seen too many armies which would have looked better unpainted,
than painted the way they were. (Not that I would ever tell this to
their owners!)
- Bill
Paul M. Brillantes
Edward J. Lizak wrote:
> Wait until someone asks about NB versus Empire (or 15's vs. 25's, or
> plastic vs. metal, it goes on and on). He will see that this group is
> full of "schism"
>
> -EJL
Actually I can't wait for that argument to start as the group I am with is using NB but two
of them would rather be using Empire. I am looking at both systems and since I have no
experience, I have no idea which to grab.
Paul Brillantes
Bill Armintrout
>And the paint jobs are part of the tournament and they get
>points for the best painted army.
This is another area where Warhammer may be leading the hobby. Their
tournaments regularly give points for painting and for sportsmanship.
I have to think that this would make a major change in enjoyment if
these same concepts were applied to historical tournaments.
Aaron Liebling
Beautiful post...a tad more aggressive than I would probably have phrased it,
but very correct on the whole. Anyone that thinks they know 'THE WAY' scares
me in the same way that the Unibomber scares me.
All of the saner postings (even those from people who are pro-painted armies
only) have said, "I don't play with unpainted armies, but do whatever you
want." This is a very sane and intelligent attitude. Don't play with anyone
you don't want to play with for whatever reason (Including the lack of a
painted army on their part), but don't assume that your attitude to whether a
certain person (or army) should be played with is anyone elses...i.e., there
is no such thing as THE WAY.
Clearly, saying that people should play boardgames if they don't want to paint
is really missing the point of why some people play miniatures games.
Cardboard counters on a hex map give a very different rules style than minis
(or cardboard counters for that matter) on a free ungridded playing surface.
My major gripe with boardgames is the restriction of hexes or
grids...something handily overcome in mini gaming.
As a side point, several posters have stated that if you don't paint the army
then you're not really playing miniature gaming at all (this often goes hand
in hand with the go play boardgames comments). I found a couple different
definitions of miniature (noun). The most appropriate seems to be:
1. a very small copy or reproduction of something. - this would seem to fit
well. Now you cannot 'copy' a living soldier, so we get by with pewter....it
could be argued that if the figure is painted well (and historically) then it
is a better reporduction and thus a better miniature, but an unpainted figure
still fits the definition (it is a reproduction, albeit sans colour). So
miniature gaming (despite what has been stated by some of the more vehemenant
painted armies only proponents) would seem to encompass playing with BOTH
painted and unpainted figures.
So if we can agree that the definition of miniature wargaming would not seem
to preclude playing with unpainted miniatures (and if we can also agree that
there are obvious benefits to this as opposed to playing a boardgame), then it
comes down to a matter of personal taste and this is a good thing. Play with
whoever you want, however you want, but if others are enjoying themselves, let
them be...you'd want the same.
Some people seem to think that even tacitly admitting that unpainted figures
aren't the evilist thing in the hobby will destroy the hobby. I'd much rather
play with an intelligent and sportsmanlike player with unpainted armies than a
rude rules lawyer with a beautiful army. Again, to each their own..Some may
think that those with unpainted armies are likely to be rude or worse gamers
and I think that (although they are sometimes right) people who think that
will miss out playing with some very friendly and intelligent opponents (who
might even want to learn to paint!).
This is not a personal attack on anyone (esp. Ray who has always been very
helpful to me)...I just wish to point out that there are different things
which please different people and trying to force your vision of right on
others only gives them tacit permission to do the same to you....a very
viscious circle which just distracts us all from the whole point of the hobby
(having fun with a historical focus)!
I personally enjoy painting when I have the time and would rather play with a
painted army than unpainted (wouldn't most people?), but in the end,
recreating the battle and the history is what is really important to me. If
this means I want to fight a battle (because I am interested in it), but don't
have painted forces for it, I could care less...I'll wade in with the
unpainted!
I hope Ray won't stop answering my questions and supporting my group with
great info just because he now knows we've been playing with unpainted Zulus!
Sure I'm working on them as fast as I can, but they'll be some unpainted for
amny months to come. We even did one Crimea battle with Zulu's as the
Russians because that was all we had. So don't play with us, but where's the
crime in us having done so if we enjoyed ourselves?
Thanks again for the excellent (if slightly aggressive post), Avatar and
thanks also to Ray for all the great info he's given me. I'd invite either of
them (or anyone else for that matter) who's in the Bay Area (San Francisco, CA
USA) either permenantly or on vacation to drop by for a game...I'll do my
level best to insure no unpainted figures, but no promises!
Best,
Aaron Liebling
Avatar wrote:
> Ray Rangel (xr...@texas.net) wrote:
> :
> : No you have it wrong. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that everyone
> : who insists on painted minis (and I count myself in that group!)
> : started in this hobby with this a one of the "unwritten rules" or
> : "codes of conduct" or "good sportsmanship". What ever you want to call
> : it, that's what most us were taught by the people who nurtured us in
> : the hobby. "My way"? I think not! It is THE WAY!
> :
> No its *your* way....I have met plenty of people in the last 20 years who
> are just thrilled to find others who share a common interest in the same
> historical periods and want to recreate some of the battles from that
> period. They have all viewed the painting as secondary, because if you
> know the history you know what the uniforms look like and they were more
> interested in recreating the historical battles than bitching about
> unpainted or partially painted armies. I joined this hobby, predominantly
> for the history all those years ago. I eventually found miniature
> painting as a hobby in its own and crossed the two over a bit, but never
> got stuck on the *you must paint* band wagon. I like painting, so it was
> not an issue, but I certainly know what it is like to spend my time doing
> things I don't enjoy so don't really care if someone I play against
> doesn't like painting so does it incredibly slowly if not at all. Its
> just never been an issue for me or any of the groups I have played in.
>
> : I'm sure I can give you references to people who will recommend
> : several board games if you don't want to paint. By the way...I've been
> : wondering...if you don't want to paint them, why buy them? Board
> : gaming is a MUCH cheaper hobby. Perhaps it's too much trouble to punch
> : out all the little chits?
> :
> THere it is again. What is it with people who keep coming back to this
> *if you don't paint play boardgames* bullshit?? A cardboard counter is
> not even remotely similar to a mini except that it marks a place where the
> unit is. After playing with minis, painted or not, counter based games
> just don't cut it. As long as you are going to make ridiculous statements
> like this how about this : As long as you require every one to have
> painted miniatures why don't *you* pay to have someone else's minis
> painted for them?? Now you're probably thinking, *well they're not my
> minis* which is exactly what you should be thinking...you should also be
> thinking that when you are pressuring someone into painting all their
> minis before your would give them the time of day too....
>
> : It is a collective standard on which Clay, myself, and several others
> : have taken a stand. It is a pooling of gaming experience and many
> : years of gaming etiquette. These are not isolated standards created by
> : a few individuals. Rather it is a genleman's code that has been passed
> : from player to player and generation to generation.
> :
Christopher Lee Frame
Jay wrote:
> Christopher Lee Frame <fr...@essc.psu.edu> wrote:
>
> > (and if some absent minded, overweight
> >gamer steps on the paper miniature counters, they don't CRUNCH and no one
> >WHINES - and it seems to be the overweight guys that normally crunch stuff
> >up - 1/72nd scale plastic cav don't stand a chance against 250 lbs of
> >angry wargamer).
>
> That's why you play on a table, or use metal figs. Trust me, the 250lb
> clod will only step on a 15mm pikeman _once_ (if you play on the
> floor, shoes MUST be removed).
An absolutely excellent idea. I remove my boots just because it is more
comfortable and it IS repeatedly the people that wear shoes that crunch the
damn minis. Uh Oh, I hope I don't get labeled a "tight ass" for making people
play without shoes.
As for a table, we play in an area about 24 ft x 30 ft, so a table would be
difficult for these large games (when we do play on a table the problem is
people spilling drinks).
> >I have seen some extremely impressive paint jobs, but I go to wargame, not
> >admire the figures. For those of you that INSIST on playing only with
> >people that paint figures, that's fine, but I'm more open minded. I just
> >don't have the time to sit and paint figures, nor am I willing to pay
> >someone to do it for me.
>
> I think you are making a gross assumption.
Actually it was my poor choice of words that brought this on. I SHOULD have
said playing with painted figures as opposed to people that paint figures.
> Not one of the posters has
> said he would play only with people that paint figures. The deal is
> that we won't play with unpainted figures.
I understand and have no problem playing with painted figures (I just borrow
them - incidently they usually are returned in BETTER shape than when I get
them because I repair - with permission - "fallen" riders, and loose figures on
stands).
CFrame
Christopher Lee Frame
Jay wrote:
> They still have to be painted
> to get on my board because MY hobby involves three things: history,
> toy soldiers and a game. If you play in MY sandbox you'll use painted
> figs. BTW, I probably won't play in your sandbox for the very reason
> you don't paint figs: my time is limited, so I use it to get _all_ of
> the experiences out of a game that I want, including admiring a
> well-painted, historically accurate, figure.
>
> Jay
Yes, I have always had my jaw drop to the floor at conventions when I see an
excellently painted horde of figures/equipment on an excellent terrain. I
don't blame you for not wanting unpainted figures on it because the look
certainly can be considered alot of the hype for the wargame.
Seems, I've come about 180 degrees and accepted that "must paint" people for
their merits.
CFrame
Conor O'Dowd
I can't believe what I'm seeing here!!!
Surely the only worthwhile answer is another question (the Irish way!)
"Does your opponent mind?"
Now let's get back to the serious stuff.
Jay
clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith) wrote:
>In article <199806030404...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
>tyg...@aol.com (TYGHOCK) writes:
>
>
>> 2. 15 vs. 25 - Only 25mm is acceptable. Wimps. Next.
>>
>
>I agree! 25mm is the best!
25mm is for the old and infirm who's eyes are going.
Just adding my own fuel to a potential fire.
Jay
Ottawa, Ontario
Remove the * when replying.
Jay
ava...@netaxs.com (Avatar) wrote:
>No its *your* way....I have met plenty of people in the last 20 years who
>are just thrilled to find others who share a common interest in the same
>historical periods and want to recreate some of the battles from that
>period. They have all viewed the painting as secondary, because if you
>know the history you know what the uniforms look like and they were more
>interested in recreating the historical battles than bitching about
>unpainted or partially painted armies.
That is _your_ way, which I don't have to accept either. The gaming
group to which I belong certainly isn't too tightassed about this
issue, after all, some of our guys play with plastics (yuk). But the
painting is as important as the history or the play to many of us. We
don't force people to paint minis, and we accept unpainted figs if
it's a new period or something that makes it necessary, but painting
will always be part of the whole package.
If you examine your stance vs Clay's, and examine it closely, I think
you'll see something similar in the two. For you the _play_ is the
thing (apologies to the Bard), for Clay it's the paint (or so he
says). For me it's the whole package, you can't have one without the
other (though I could certainly drop the painting and the playing
before I'd drop the history, which is my passion).
>THere it is again. What is it with people who keep coming back to this
>*if you don't paint play boardgames* bullshit?? A cardboard counter is
>not even remotely similar to a mini except that it marks a place where the
>unit is.
A mini marks the place where a unit is. Unless you only do 1:1
skirmish, all minis are representative.
> After playing with minis, painted or not, counter based games
>just don't cut it.
Exactly. And after having played with a whole table of painted minis,
primered or unpainted ones just don't cut it.
> As long as you are going to make ridiculous statements
>like this how about this : As long as you require every one to have
>painted miniatures why don't *you* pay to have someone else's minis
>painted for them??
Why don't those who don't have painted minis yet just use the ones
that the rest of the club members have? My group has several players
who've _never_ contributed a figure, yet they are still welcome. We'd
like to convince them to paint some figs, but if they just want to
play, that's their business.
>I don't know. I don't see too much gentlemanly conduct in laughing people
>out of groups for having poorly painted or unpainted minis.
Unpainted is acceptable under certain circumstances, but it should be
the exception, not the rule. No one said anything about laughing at
'poorly painted' minis (unless you count a dab of colour for the coat
and a dab for the trousers as poorly painted, vice unpainted). When my
whole Napoleonic army is arrayed on the table anyone can see that the
quality of paint job varies from primitive to fairly good (if I do say
so myself). My bad figs get a lower priority when I set up a game, but
they don't get thrown out, and they _are_ painted.
>I've taught and played with many new
>players who tried to join a group and were thrown out because they didn't
>have fully painted armies immediately after starting the hobby...They were
>ready to abandon everything...What a bloody waste that is.....
Oh bullshit! The only groups I've known that were so elitist faded so
quickly that they aren't even a vague memory. You're yanking a
fictional sympathy chain here. How many is "many?" Two or three?
>You are certainly free to play your games as you see fit, but be aware
>that otyhers are allow to play their games as they see fit....
Right, and if you want to have a game, come and play (and be
thrashed), but don't expect us to use unpainted stuff if painted is
available.
Jay
bsmi...@erols.com (Bill Smith) wrote:
>Hmmmm, here I have to disagree. I can paint a figure (I'm presently
>doing OG's 25mm Highland Infantry and Command) crappily in about 15
>minutes. However, to paint it well, it takes about two days per
>figure. I find I do my best work in short bursts--so I work one area
>of the figure, leave it and come back later.
Two days! You mean it takes two sessions to paint a fig (you don't
actually spend 48 hours of real time to do one fig, do you?)
Some figs take longer to paint. I can do about 10 French light
infantry in the time it takes to paint two Hussars (that's 15mm),
which is about 3-4 hours. The 3-4 hours isn't constant at the table
though (and those are 15mm, I'd probably at least double the time for
25mm). I assembly-line paint though, and don't always finishe a
project before I start another.
Jay
clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith) wrote:
>Do you guys want to discuss NB? I am *THE* standard bearer for the "I
>hate Napoleon's Battles" side....everyone who's been here for years
>will remember me....
Pleease don't encourage him people. The thread will go on for months!!
Jay
clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith) wrote:
>That's exactly what this is - a STAND. On the Warhammer group I was
>tolerant. Not here. Not with this hobby, that I love so much. I
>would rather play Napoleon's Battles every week than play any game with
>unpainted figures!
Which, of course, means that a certain appendage of yours would be
decorating a wall, rather than being attached where it should be.
Edward J. Lizak
Points:
- But just the other day someone mentioned (in this thread I think)
that they were going to use do this in a game they were running at a
Con and they were labelled "assinine" for being so unfair.
- It's rare when I see a Warhammer game played around here that
doesn't have at least some unpainted lead on the table.
- To me playing with unpainted lead is saying that you are not really
committed to the hobby. I agree that it is wrong to discourage a new
person to the hobby but IMO a person who will not paint their troops
will not be in the hobby for long. That's why the Warhammer crowd
(that I know of) uses so much unpainted lead. They are in the hobby
this month until the next Card game, computer game, or whatever comes
along. Painting your figures just shows a level of comitment that I
can appreciate.
-EJL
Paul Hummerston
At the CanCon (Canberra Wargames Convention) each year the Horse & Musket
competition presents "The Duke of Cumberland" Award for sporting behaviour.
I happened to win it last year, not because my Ottoman Turks were the best
painted, not because I was coming first (although none of my opponents
really knew how to handle an army that was entirely irregular, and neither
did I :-) but because I was there to play with my toys and have a good time
and not get wrapped up in rule wrangling and millimeter measurement
arguements
Paul
Bill Armintrout <barmi...@psygnosis.com> wrote in article
<3575d77f...@client.se.news.psi.net>...
Paul Hummerston
I just re-read my post and should point out that I actually came about 6th
out of 10 for that comp - my usual result with Ottomans, Russians, British
Light Division or any other army, and the best painted army was probably
Darren Berwick's Jacobite Scots (claymores and lochaber axes everywhere!).
There appears to be no direct relationship between painting skills, battle
skills and sporting behaviour. You may have all, none or some of these, but
having one does not imply that you have any of the others.
Paul
Paul Hummerston <Paul_hu...@bca.aust.com> wrote in article
<01bd8f74$02481a60$9f3e0dcb@tosh460_236.bca.aust.com>...
Dugbonz
To the early remark that historical gamers should be more like Warhammer
players (rating units by painting ability) allow me to point out that this has
been standard practice in most UK tournaments for years. (Long before
warhammer). I don't really agree with demoting a guys units because he didn't
use a proper wash for the 3-d effect. I do however believe that you should do
the best job you know how to do, and have everything painted! If your just
gonna put unpainted lead on the table (I see this far more in fantasy games
that anything else) you might as well play a board game. Tom Castanos
Steve H.
Edward J. Lizak wrote:
>
> Points:
>
> - But just the other day someone mentioned (in this thread I think)
> that they were going to use do this in a game they were running at a
> Con and they were labelled "assinine" for being so unfair.
>
No - the poster in question stated that he was going to determine the
morale of an army in the wargame competition based on the paint job of
the army. I'd support the idea of a best painted army prize, and be even
more supportive of a sportsmanship prize, but what this guy was doing
was saying, "if you can't paint well, be prepared to have your army get
drubbed". That's "assinine" as it takes no account of those people who
simply don't paint well, but may have spent weeks painting that army...
(that's me!! :o) )
Steve H.
--
(spam proofing: remove the *'s in the id. above when replying by email)
David G. Bell
In article <3575d5d1...@client.se.news.psi.net>
barmi...@psygnosis.com writes:
> Have you considered that the pressure to play only with painted
> miniatures could have a tendency to lead to hastily painted (poorly
> painted) figures?
>
> I have seen too many armies which would have looked better unpainted,
> than painted the way they were. (Not that I would ever tell this to
> their owners!)
I'd be a little wary of letting people use totally unpainted figures,
though coloured plastic comes out ahead of metal. And there are other
colours for primers besides white, grey, and black. Red oxide, for
instance, is one I've seen. The colour, incidentally, rather than
necessarily the pigment. Ten minutes with a spray can is quick, doesn't
prevent later, 'proper', painting, and does make a difference.
So somebody starts off with spraying their British Napoleonic infantry
red. (Except for the rifles. Black, perhaps?) It's a start. What
next? Grey trousers, perhaps, except for the officers. Use the quick
and easy spray can as a starting point. Encourage the newcomers.
Show them some of the basic tricks that are easy and quick.
--
Cheap Food \
Safe Food > Pick any two of three.
Healthy Food /
Avatar
Aaron Liebling (aaron@*Removethis*addesigninc.com) wrote:
: Beautiful post...a tad more aggressive than I would probably have phrased it,
: but very correct on the whole. Anyone that thinks they know 'THE WAY' scares
: me in the same way that the Unibomber scares me.
Thanks, and yeah it was a little aggresive...sory folks...this subject
just irritates me, even as a painter. I love to see two fully painted
armies fight it out on the table top, but just never let the painting get
in the way a of a good tactical challange...
: All of the saner postings (even those from people who are pro-painted armies
: only) have said, "I don't play with unpainted armies, but do whatever you
: want." This is a very sane and intelligent attitude. Don't play with anyone
: you don't want to play with for whatever reason (Including the lack of a
: painted army on their part), but don't assume that your attitude to whether a
: certain person (or army) should be played with is anyone elses...i.e., there
: is no such thing as THE WAY.
This is a good way to do it. There are three paths that people who are
rebuffed strongly for having unpainted minis can choose to follow: 1)
Paint all their minis immediately, 2) Continue to play with unpainted
minis with people who aren't concerned, or 3) Leave the hobby entirely
because of a bad experience. If I made plans to play a game with Clay at
his place I would expect to follow the house rules of only painted
miniatures. That is a given. If on the other hand I am playing at
another individual's home who doesn't have all their minis painted I would
not expect such a rule to be in force.
: 1. a very small copy or reproduction of something. - this would seem to fit
: well. Now you cannot 'copy' a living soldier, so we get by with pewter....it
: could be argued that if the figure is painted well (and historically) then it
: is a better reporduction and thus a better miniature, but an unpainted figure
: still fits the definition (it is a reproduction, albeit sans colour). So
: miniature gaming (despite what has been stated by some of the more vehemenant
: painted armies only proponents) would seem to encompass playing with BOTH
: painted and unpainted figures.
Now think how interestingt his hobby would be if we all had little armies,
that *acted out* the battle following our orders to the subcommanders on
the table top. That would certainly be pretty damn cool, but instead of
all the headaches about painting, it would instead become headaches about
sewing little detailed uniforms for all of the troops...;)
: So if we can agree that the definition of miniature wargaming would not seem
: to preclude playing with unpainted miniatures (and if we can also agree that
: there are obvious benefits to this as opposed to playing a boardgame), then it
: comes down to a matter of personal taste and this is a good thing. Play with
: whoever you want, however you want, but if others are enjoying themselves, let
: them be...you'd want the same.
Very well put, though some on the painting side do feel that agreeing to
accept that some players can play with unpainted minis is a detriment to
the hobby and will cause a downward spiral to a pint where most new
players will never paint. I still like the concept that house rules
apply. If you are playing somewhere, where no rules are set up that
require painted minis, they you cannot be annoyed or surprised if you face
an opponent without a fully painted army. If you do play somwhere where
such rulings are in force then sure an individual with unpainted minis
would be out of place and inappropriate.
: Some people seem to think that even tacitly admitting that unpainted figures
: aren't the evilist thing in the hobby will destroy the hobby. I'd much rather
: play with an intelligent and sportsmanlike player with unpainted armies than a
: rude rules lawyer with a beautiful army. Again, to each their own..Some may
: think that those with unpainted armies are likely to be rude or worse gamers
: and I think that (although they are sometimes right) people who think that
: will miss out playing with some very friendly and intelligent opponents (who
: might even want to learn to paint!).
I agree wholehearted here. I am more interested in intelligent and fun
opponents than worrying if every little bit of their army is painted
properly all the time. Some folks, like Clay (sorry to keep using you for
ane xample Clay, but it fits....:), have fully painted armies and a lot of
expereince at the gaming table and have the best of both worlds, as it
were, *but* other people with fully painted armies really wouldn't know
how to fight their way out of a wet paper bag. So painting, to me, does
not always mean good player. The same also holds true for those wtih
unpainted minis. I've played some excellent opponents with unpainted
minis, and have also played against some people with unpainted minis who
are only doing histroical mini gaming as the hobby of the month....As a
wargamer for the last 20 years or so I like to think that I am a
tactically sound player, even though I will use unpainted minis from time
to time as I build new armies and the like. Eventually things do get
painted, though....
: This is not a personal attack on anyone (esp. Ray who has always been very
: helpful to me)...I just wish to point out that there are different things
: which please different people and trying to force your vision of right on
: others only gives them tacit permission to do the same to you....a very
: viscious circle which just distracts us all from the whole point of the hobby
: (having fun with a historical focus)!
Considering how laid back your comments are compared to some of my own I
can't see how anyone could view this post as any kind of an attack...;) A
sane voice on a usually very headted topic...I try ot maintain an even
keel, but when I read more than 10 posts on this subject in a row it kind
of sets me on edge......Maybe I should start reading those 10 posts and
then walk away from my computer for a little while and then come back and
post my replies.
: I personally enjoy painting when I have the time and would rather play with a
: painted army than unpainted (wouldn't most people?), but in the end,
: recreating the battle and the history is what is really important to me. If
: this means I want to fight a battle (because I am interested in it), but don't
: have painted forces for it, I could care less...I'll wade in with the
: unpainted!
You are the type of person who introduced me to the mini side of
wargaming. I started out with games like Panzer Blitz and Panzer Leader
and moved into minis from there. I still play some of those Avalon Hill
counter games, but the counters just leave me wanting more after playing
with actual minis for so many years.
: I hope Ray won't stop answering my questions and supporting my group with
: great info just because he now knows we've been playing with unpainted Zulus!
: Sure I'm working on them as fast as I can, but they'll be some unpainted for
: amny months to come. We even did one Crimea battle with Zulu's as the
: Russians because that was all we had. So don't play with us, but where's the
: crime in us having done so if we enjoyed ourselves?
Oh my!! The scandal!! Wait! Wait! You can't let anyone know that you
had fun playing with unpainted minis!! Once word of that gets out the
hobby is ruined...;)
: Thanks again for the excellent (if slightly aggressive post), Avatar and
: thanks also to Ray for all the great info he's given me. I'd invite either of
: them (or anyone else for that matter) who's in the Bay Area (San Francisco, CA
: USA) either permenantly or on vacation to drop by for a game...I'll do my
: level best to insure no unpainted figures, but no promises!
:
Well, its your house, so IMHO, your rules....:)
Avatar
Avatar
Jay (mjmartino@igs*.net) wrote:
:
: If you examine your stance vs Clay's, and examine it closely, I think
: you'll see something similar in the two. For you the _play_ is the
: thing (apologies to the Bard), for Clay it's the paint (or so he
: says). For me it's the whole package, you can't have one without the
: other (though I could certainly drop the painting and the playing
: before I'd drop the history, which is my passion).
Actually the whole package applies to both Clay and myself, its just that
he won't play someone who doesn't use painted minis, and I won't play
someone just because they have painted minis. We both want to play and we
both like to paint....
: A mini marks the place where a unit is. Unless you only do 1:1
: skirmish, all minis are representative.
The point is that a mini *looks* like what it represents, whil a flat,
square piece of cardboard does not.
: Why don't those who don't have painted minis yet just use the ones
: that the rest of the club members have? My group has several players
: who've _never_ contributed a figure, yet they are still welcome. We'd
: like to convince them to paint some figs, but if they just want to
: play, that's their business.
That is very different from some of the comments that have been made in
the thread too. To me this makes perfect sense and the club thrives and
is good. And as I've said in other posts, your club/house, your rules.
: Oh bullshit! The only groups I've known that were so elitist faded so
: quickly that they aren't even a vague memory. You're yanking a
: fictional sympathy chain here. How many is "many?" Two or three?
After 20 years I have found many dozens of people like this, whether you
belive it or not, is your problem, but I do take offense to effectively
being called a liar, which I am not. This does happen. I've met people
who have been rebuffed from histroical groups and people who have been
rebuffed from warhammer based groups. The end result was the same. They
were ready to abandon the hobby because no one would play with them and
let them learn how to use their forces because they were not fully painted
yet. I did not say that every group does this either. Some do some
don't. Usually when I find someone who wants to get into the hobby I will
encourage them to play a couple games using my minis to see what they like
and the go from there and then I don't have a problem playing with them as
they learn and paint. Encouragement is the primary factor here. Plenty
of groups do encourage people to come in and use their figures to play
while they paint their own and do so in a non-derogatory fashion. Others
will *not* make the offer or will tell someone to leave until they've got
their forces ready. It all depends on the people in the group and what
kind of folks they are.
: Right, and if you want to have a game, come and play (and be
: thrashed), but don't expect us to use unpainted stuff if painted is
: available.
:
If I was playing on your table I wouldn't expect to use unpainted minis.
Just as a point of order, as much as I dislike the *must have painted
minis or else* line I am an avid mini painter and have hundreds of painted
minis that I use in games...The whole point of my arguement is that people
have been playing with unpainted minis for years, it has not destroyed the
hobby in anyway, and people should be free to play the way they choose. I
would not force Clay to play with unpainted minis (I'd be afraid his head
might explode or something), nor would I expect to show up at his place
and play with unpainted minis (which is unlikely anyway since we both live
on opposite sides of the country...but hypothetically here...). By the
same token if he came to my place and someone there had unpainted minis I
would let him know and if he had a problemw tih it it would be his choice
not to play, but if he came anyway he would be accepting our house
standards. That's all it boils down to...Meanwhile encourage those who
are new to the hobby to paint their minis or learn to paint....
Avatar
GMurphy614
Wow! I was the third person to comment on this last week, and already over 60
of you folks have chimed in! LOL I'm glad to see that gamers are so
passionate about unpainted figs. Most of the posts have a lot of merit.
Anyway, to my little story. I live in New Orleans, and most of us play at one
central store. In this store is a no good son of a bad woman who I wouldn't
mention by name, but claims to be a " master artist." He sits around the store
and bellows about how others paint. The fact that he can do a 25mm fig in
under 10 minutes makes him think he can paint. The fact that his figures look
like CRAP makes me think he can't. He has no job in the store other than to
paint figs for the owner and to have a generally bad attitude. One night
during a drunken Halloween party, I suggested to the owner that I might be able
to paint some of his figures for free. I don't claim to be a " master
painter", nor would I say my figures are a 10. But I take my time, match my
paints, use Windsor and Newton inks, and try to do my best.
I walked into the store the next day, and started to paint the owner's figures.
This " master painter" took such a dislike to me, all he could do was bitch.
I sat down, started to paint, and finished two figs in about 3 1/2 hours. "
Master painter" told me exactly, " Well, if I took that long to paint figures,
I couldn't sell my jobs for fifty cents apiece." I retorted, " Well, I
wouldn't sell mine for fifty cents. That is an insult to only get fity cents."
I believe that cut him to the bone. He told me that my inks were stupid, and
that he would never use them.
30 mintues later.....he begged me to take him to the art store for Windsor and
Newton inks. In fact, he bought the big $30 ink set. Ever since that day, I
refuse to paint in that store. Others bring their stuff in to paint, but I
wouldn't relive that day for anything. I do believe that moral of that story
is: No one has a right to insult your paint jobs. It's just that simple....
Guy Murphy
GMurp...@aol.com
Clay Smith
In article <3576051b...@news.igs.net>
mjmartino@igs*.net (Jay) writes:
> >
> >I agree! 25mm is the best!
>
> 25mm is for the old and infirm who's eyes are going.
>
> Just adding my own fuel to a potential fire.
And your point is....?? ("He's got a point. Too bad it's on the top
of his head!")
Clay Smith
In article <3576061f...@news.igs.net>
mjmartino@igs*.net (Jay) writes:
> Why don't those who don't have painted minis yet just use the ones
> that the rest of the club members have? My group has several players
> who've _never_ contributed a figure, yet they are still welcome. We'd
> like to convince them to paint some figs, but if they just want to
> play, that's their business.
>
So does the Dallas TNI group. We even have a guy who buys figures,
pays the 'Colour Sergent' to paint them, and then sells them to us (for
less than he paid), and borrows them to play with! Whatever!
Historical gamers don't have the 'this is my army, get your own'
attitude. My group has THOUSANDS of figures...what we need are more
people to push them around the table!
We do expect a certain amount of contribution in the long run from our
more 'permanent' members...
Check us out! http://rampages.onramp.net/~csmith
> No one said anything about laughing at
> 'poorly painted' minis
I did. We had a REGULAR PLAYER (not a newbie....) show up with some
25mm Crimean war Turks sprayed BLUE and he passed them off as
Yankees... Not only did we laugh at him...he deserved it, and knew it,
and apologized (we'd have given him the damn figures to paint) and we
stole the Turks as a 'trophy'!!
Clay Smith
In article <199806040603...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
dug...@aol.com (Dugbonz) writes:
> To the early remark that historical gamers should be more like Warhammer
> players (rating units by painting ability) allow me to point out that this has
> been standard practice in most UK tournaments for years.
This is a great idea! Painting and sportsmanship should be factored
into tournament winners....
But painting shouldn't be 'ranked'. For example, if you had a great
looking army with a lot of detail and conversions but some guy had a Da
Vinci masterpiece, it wouldn't hurt you. The grade for painting should
'top out' at a certain level so the exceptional paint jobs don't lower
the curve for everyone else....
John M. Atkinson
On Thu, 04 Jun 1998 03:43:48 GMT, e...@one.net.remove (Edward J. Lizak)
wrote:
>- To me playing with unpainted lead is saying that you are not really
>committed to the hobby. I agree that it is wrong to discourage a new
>person to the hobby but IMO a person who will not paint their troops
To me the issue isn't so much people who won't paint their figs
period, but people who havn't had time to--YET. Following cases, all
from my life:
1)Bought the figs at about noon, game was that evening. I based 'em
and used 'em. Took them home and primered them, and by the next month
they were done. Guy who was running it looked at them and said, "I'll
let you this time since I saw you buy them today, but next month they
have to at least show progress." Note that this was a month or two
after I got introduced to the miniatures side of the hobby.
2)Full Command Decision regiment of infantry, ready to go. Except for
the mortar stands (1 per batallion, ie 3 out of maybe 40), which were
painted and based on bare metal--hadn't had time to paint and flock
bases same as rest of regiment. In fact I had run out of the correct
sized bases and bought them that day, glued them on out in the car
half an hour before game started. Finished it that Saturday, but the
hassle I got was one of the reasons I started to sour on WWII.
3)DBA army with bare metal bases, and two stands of cavalry hadn't had
the riders glued to the horses and their lances were primer-colored
and those six rider figs still needed some touchup on details.
Finished it off (including basing and flocking) the next week--but no
one said a word to me at the game session. Why? Because when I
pulled them out of the cases, I mentioned I had been painting them up
to about two hours before I left for the game, and they had seen my
Carthaginian and Elizabeathan English armies which were done
completely before I used them--they knew I was going to have it done
by the next week. I just really wanted to try out my Byzantines
against the Seljuk Turks another player had just finished up, and no
one had any to lend me.
I know what Clay Smith would say about these three cases (the only
ones out of two years in the miniatures hobby I've used unpainted
lead), but what's the opinion of the rest of ya'll?
John M. Atkinson
"When you send a man out with a gun, you create a policymaker.
When his ass is on the line, he will do whatever he needs to do.
"And if the implications of that bother you, the time to do
something about it is before you decide to send him out."
---David Drake,
Avatar
Clay Smith (clay....@nospam.eds.com) wrote:
:
: But painting shouldn't be 'ranked'. For example, if you had a great
: looking army with a lot of detail and conversions but some guy had a Da
: Vinci masterpiece, it wouldn't hurt you. The grade for painting should
: 'top out' at a certain level so the exceptional paint jobs don't lower
: the curve for everyone else....
I agree that painting should not be ranked...On the historical side this
is a little easier to perform, but comparing the historical accuracy of
the colors represented instead of who can paint the most detail on a
button. On the warhammer side it s alittle hard to quanitify since there
aren't really any historical equivalents so better painting gets better
points so the poor painters end up penalized....
Avatar
SAE
I think that if you're going to trash someone's paint job, you might as
well make fun of their clothes and hairstyle as well. I look at it as a
hobby and something that I enjoy. Granted, I think I do a pretty good job
and I'm always polite if someone makes an effort. The last thing I want to
see is wargaming turn into a bunch of women gossiping/criticizing like the
beauty shop in Steel Magnolias. Just to add my two cents. :)
Scott
Thomas Whitten
John M. Atkinson wrote:
>
>
> I know what Clay Smith would say about these three cases (the only
> ones out of two years in the miniatures hobby I've used unpainted
> lead), but what's the opinion of the rest of ya'll?
>
John, you done goood.
t.w.
Clay Smith
In article <199806041436...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
gmurp...@aol.com (GMurphy614) writes:
> I do believe that moral of that story
> is: No one has a right to insult your paint jobs. It's just that simple....
I agree 100%. Anyone who seriously cuts down someone because they
don't paint as well is an asshole.
My first experience was back about 1980 at the Yaquinto works in
Dallas. Every Saturday we played Ship of the Line, with hand-made
ships. It was a campaign where ship perfomance was tracked, and the
owners would only lend out the ships that weren't doing so good...there
was no way us 'newbies' could get some grade!
I decided to make my own. Once a ship was built it couldn't be
duplicated for the purposes of this campaign, so I was stuck with the
Danes. I did tons of research at the UTA library and worked very hard
on a squadron of seven ships. The trouble is, I messed them up.
The frigates had four masts (oops!). One ship was pink (there's a
painting of a Danish ship at Copenhagen and the damn thing is pink!)
My sails were cut out of grocery bags because I thought it would look
better than white paper....and my ships were way too big and out of
scale.
The first time I played, I took a load of shit...then I said "Hey, at
least I made an effort." It was smooth sailing after that. Later, I
did some more ships and did a better job....but I still have those
crappy Danes and will keep them forever.
So when some new gamer shows up with his first effort and it looks like
hell, I just congratulate him and tell him to keep going...my stuff
used to look like that (and I still have the figures to prove it...only
time makes you a better painter).
Clay Smith
In article <3576bb73...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
jatk...@ix.you.know.what.to.remove.netcom.com (John M. Atkinson)
writes:
>
> 1)Bought the figs at about noon, game was that evening. I based 'em
> and used 'em. Took them home and primered them, and by the next month
> they were done. Guy who was running it looked at them and said, "I'll
> let you this time since I saw you buy them today, but next month they
> have to at least show progress." Note that this was a month or two
> after I got introduced to the miniatures side of the hobby.
>
In my group it would be "Great - but set 'em aside for tonight and use
our stuff."
> 2)Full Command Decision regiment of infantry, ready to go. Except for
> the mortar stands (1 per batallion, ie 3 out of maybe 40), which were
> painted and based on bare metal-
That's fine. Just finish them. I base on olive-colored matte board
specifically for this reason....(to get away with not having the bases
done..)
> 3)DBA army
Who cares?
>
> I know what Clay Smith would say
Well...did I?
Stan Olson
Steve H. wrote:
>
Stan: I hope people that have done the cleaning, priming
and basic paint job on their figures, realize that
They have done Most of the tedious work, Already .
I would consider helping such a person, add detail
or shading to them ... this would be how they could
learn to do this themselves, or secure my assistance
by perhaps bartering some other figures they no longer
want ... or both ! I have no time to paint another's
army from scratch, but I have time to advise and demonstrate
painting methodology, and stuff like dat dere ...
Its a win win situation, as we get to face-fight better
painted armies and people learn in a hands on manner ...
I think it is Obligitory that Painters pass on the
techniques they use, as very few learn well by
trial and error, (with its result of either incredulous
accolades or none too subtle ridicule ...)
Teaching gives the person confidence, that
hassling and snide remarks, do not ...
Edward J. Lizak
He said he was running a game and was going to use the paint job as a
way to rate the morale. I have heard stories from the "old-timers"
around here that say that is how they use to run games. Of course
they were casting their own and when you had a casualty you smashed
the figure with a hammer. Wierd, but I digress...
I think if a person wants to run a game this way and states it up
front what's wrong with that? Participants getting into the game will
know up front what the game will be like. Consider it a painting
competition with gaming thrown in. Anyone that is so worried about
winning at a Con that they can't play in this type of game because
they might be at a disadvantage is probably too uptight to enjoy
themselves anyway (and would whine if they didn't get the best rated
troops). Besides he never mentioned what others things would be
thrown in. Perhaps lower morale troops would be more plentiful (on
defense, etc.).
Are we so worried that someone might get their feelings hurt because
they only got a "C" rating for morale? Oh, I forgot this is the era
of Political Correctness.
-EJL
On Thu, 04 Jun 1998 12:10:59 -0400, "Steve H."
<stevej_hicks@uk.*ibm*.com> wrote:
>Edward J. Lizak wrote:
>>
>> Points:
>>
>> - But just the other day someone mentioned (in this thread I think)
>> that they were going to use do this in a game they were running at a
>> Con and they were labelled "assinine" for being so unfair.
>>
>
>No - the poster in question stated that he was going to determine the
>morale of an army in the wargame competition based on the paint job of
>the army. I'd support the idea of a best painted army prize, and be even
>more supportive of a sportsmanship prize, but what this guy was doing
>was saying, "if you can't paint well, be prepared to have your army get
>drubbed". That's "assinine" as it takes no account of those people who
>simply don't paint well, but may have spent weeks painting that army...
>(that's me!! :o) )
>
>Steve H.
>
Jay
clay....@nospam.eds.com (Clay Smith) wrote:
Interpretation here, I think. To me a blue sprayed bunch of figs has
just been primered blue. "Poorly painted" indicates at least some
effort was made.
Jay
Thomas Whitten <whi...@nospam.cae.wisc.edu> wrote:
> Gentlemen's' code subsection P:
>
> If approached by a player whose army is unpainted:
> a) Offer to loan one of your armies which is already painted for play.
>
> b) If after a) player stills prefers to use their own unpainted army play them
>anyway.
>
> c) After the game show them painted minis and offer help them get started in
>painting.
>
> d) If they don't want to paint accept that it is their personal choice and
>freedom.
>
> e) Realize your opinion is no more valid than theirs.
And an individual who refuses to paint, or play with offered painted
figs, will soon be snubbed. Sorry if that sounds extremist, but anyone
who absolutely refuses to play with anything other than unpainted lead
(even if it's for some silly idea like it's his own), doesn't belong
in the typical minis group. His opinion is no more valid than ours,
but it's also our choice of association.
> There is nothing courteous about mocking out a persons preference not to paint. It
>is the same as someone walking up to you and telling you what a waste of time it was for
>you to paint all your minis.
In the early days of our group getting into Napoleonics we
periodically had players who used unpainted figs. The ribbing that
went on was a gentle encouragement to paint. If someone prefers not to
paint, we don't mind (as I pointed out in another post, and as Clay
admitted as well), but that individual had better not expect to
continually force unpainted figs on us.
Jay
barmi...@psygnosis.com (Bill Armintrout) wrote:
>Have you considered that the pressure to play only with painted
>miniatures could have a tendency to lead to hastily painted (poorly
>painted) figures?
>
>I have seen too many armies which would have looked better unpainted,
>than painted the way they were. (Not that I would ever tell this to
>their owners!)
In my experience, good terrain, with poorly painted figures, is better
than _anything_ with unpainted or only primered figures (though I'll
admit that the gorgeous Gettysburg repro terrain I saw, for a battle
fought in 6mm with _pins_, was better than alot of crappy
terrain-beautiful figure conbinations I've seen).
Jay
gra...@maxwell.ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) wrote:
>One of the danger signs: the number of hobby shops that carry historical
>miniatures and/or boardgames is dropping rapidly.
>
>Do we really want to alienate anyone who is interested in the general
>hobby?
I libve in "Gamer's Heaven." We have two shops that carry minis (and
admittedly limited selection), and, until recently, two mail-order
guys that could be called, and would meet you somehwere downtown with
your order. We also have no less than five well-advertised gaming
clubs, of which one, the one that I'm in, is exclusively historical
miniatures. There are also at least two informal groups that meet at
one of the shops to play GW stuff and that popular space game (the
name escapes me).
Maybe I'm spoiled, but it means I don't have to deal with going to the
club, hoping for a good minis matchup, and finding a game of Magic,
the Obsession or some railroad game on the go.
Anyone who shows up at our group wanting to do something that doesn't
fit our charter (which permits only "historical," and "miniature, with
allowances for DBM/DBA stuff), is politely directed to a group that
fits his interest.
Jay
jatk...@ix.you.know.what.to.remove.netcom.com (John M. Atkinson)
wrote:
>I know what Clay Smith would say about these three cases (the only
>ones out of two years in the miniatures hobby I've used unpainted
>lead), but what's the opinion of the rest of ya'll?
All of the cases you mentioned are ones that would be accepted if your
troops were critical to the game. You also demonstrate that you _do_
paint, and just may not have the time. Our group, however, has
postponed games 'till some things were painted (we put on a pickup
game instead), and we also encourage players to not run games unless
they have painted figs (be it their own, or borrowed. 'Till we had
enough Russian Napoleonics painted, we used to borrow the army of one
of the local shop owners, who had no time to game himself).
I'd like to add, since I haven't mentioned it before, that our group
games in an open room of the Canadian War Museum. We think it'd be
somewhat of a betrayal of their kindness (we pay no rent) to put on
non-historical (though fictional scenarios allowed) games with
unpainted figs.
Jay
ava...@netaxs.com (Avatar) wrote:
>Clay Smith (clay....@nospam.eds.com) wrote:
>:
>: But painting shouldn't be 'ranked'.
>I agree that painting should not be ranked...On the historical side this
>is a little easier to perform, but comparing the historical accuracy of
>the colors represented instead of who can paint the most detail on a
>button. On the warhammer side it s alittle hard to quanitify since there
>aren't really any historical equivalents so better painting gets better
>points so the poor painters end up penalized....
A painting "ranking" system, or even one that awarded extra "victory
points" (to be used along with sportsmanship and actual play) would be
like adding Olympic ice dancing judges to wargaming. Keep the painting
competitions separate.
Clay Smith
In article <35775bcc...@news.igs.net>
mjmartino@igs*.net (Jay) writes:
Exactly. Or, the way I put it, "Effort" means actually giving a damn
about the figures. This guy didn't. It pissed us off. He got over
it.
Thomas Whitten
Jay wrote:
> And an individual who refuses to paint, or play with offered painted
> figs, will soon be snubbed. Sorry if that sounds extremist, but anyone
> who absolutely refuses to play with anything other than unpainted lead
> (even if it's for some silly idea like it's his own), doesn't belong
> in the typical minis group.
You are right, being a gentlemen goes both ways.
> His opinion is no more valid than ours,but it's also our choice of association.
>
Right again.
> > There is nothing courteous about mocking out a persons preference not to paint. It
> >is the same as someone walking up to you and telling you what a waste of time it was for
> >you to paint all your minis.
>
> In the early days of our group getting into Napoleonics we
> periodically had players who used unpainted figs. The ribbing that
> went on was a gentle encouragement to paint. If someone prefers not to
> paint, we don't mind (as I pointed out in another post, and as Clay
> admitted as well), but that individual had better not expect to
> continually force unpainted figs on us.
>
Perfectly reasonable.
T.W.
Dean Klein
Sorry Chris, but I have to agree with Clay on this. He's full of shit when
it comes to some of his rules opinions, but there is no room for tolerance
on unpainted miniatures.
Before I start my diatribe, let me just say this. What you or any gamer
does in private among a small group of friends is your business and nobody
elses and I won't begrudge you that, but when you go out to cons, with
people you don't know, there are certain things that just aren't done.
There's been a lot of crap written about intolerance and elitism. Well
maybe that isn't so bad. Personally:
1) I am intolerant of gamers who don't bathe yet insist on standing next to
me.
2) I am intolerant of gamers who argue with the game organizers over
trivial bullshit.
3) I am intolerant of people who like to wear their "uniforms" to
conventions.
4) I am intolerant of sore losers.
5) I am intolerant of unpainted armies, especially in tournament games.
6) I am intolerant of people who criticize the paint jobs of players who
DID put forth the effort to paint their armies.
7) I am intolerant of people who fail to grasp societal norms of behavior
when out in public.
8) I am intolerant of having my wife look at me funny when some guy named
"Wolfsblood" (or any other fantasy pseudonym) wearing his Special Forces
T-shirt, asks me if I want to play a game of "Teenagers from Outer Space"
with him over at his mom's house. (And I don't care HOW tactically
proficeint he is)
9) I am intolerant of being lumped into the same category as 1-8 simply
because I like to play historical miniatures.
Bottom Line: When you go to a convention that is open to the general
public, you're not at home in your underwear anymore. You represent this
hobby to the general public, including people who are thinking about getting
involved. That means painted lead, nice manners, good personal hygiene, and
a POSITIVE image portrayed. Because, if you screw that up, you not only
make yourself look stupid, but me and everyone else associated with the
hobby as well. And that is something that I will not tolerate. By the way,
did I mention good personal hygiene.
Regards,
Dean
P.S. And don't bother writing me to tell me that you'd never want to play
with an "intolerant" guy like me. I'll still sleep quite well.
Hubert Klak
Christopher Lee Frame wrote:
>
> TYGHOCK wrote:
> (snip)
> > 3. Plastic vs. metal - plastic's for wrapping garbage. Next.
>
> Yes, garbage such as metal figures. Incidently, if your figures don't have to AT
> LEAST five extra parts bonded to them, you can't play in my wargames, I don't
> wargame with people that ONLY paint their figures, you have to build them also
> (people that use figures that come assembled are known cheats anyway I read it in
> the rulebook).
> (snip)
> CFrame
>From this comments it seems to me that you are using plastic figures. I
have alwas one basic problem with them - make a paint staing on model.
Are you using any special primer, or any other method to solve a problem
with droping of paint?
I agree that plastic is very usfull for conversions, but it is terrible
for painting.
Best Regards
Hubert
Hubert Klak
Christopher Lee Frame wrote:
>
> Yes, I generally use plastic for figures (1/72), but metal for armor (1/285). I have
> ALOT of problems with paint sticking and so do the grognards that I've played with and
> against that insist on painting their thousand 1/72nd scale plastic figures (they get
> worse looking after every game).
Well, I have exactly the same problem. After some time all painted units
look only "half" painted, no mater how carrefully you move figures. I
have tried many different primers and sealers (including white glue as a
sealer - till now it is best of all I tried, but it is not perfect -
paint still go away, but a little bit slower).
>
> Maybe if I got some 1/72 metal stuff I would be more moved to paint it. I DO like
> painting my 1/285th microarmor and it wears well.
I have the same experience with microarmor and micronauts. So I am
looking around for 1/72 metal figures. Unfortunatelly it is rather
uncommon scale for them. Some I have found keep paint properly so I am
considering using them more extensivelly. And it is not a matter of
ideology (all this thread about unpainted figures etc. look like Holly
War) it is just practical aproach. If I can find paint that stick on
plastic I will stay with them.
>
> Okay, I can see why people might say plastic sucks, but it is cheap up front (in the
> long run it may not be).
I am comming to the same point - I think, this plastic is more expensive
in long run.
>
> Happy Wargaming,
>
> CFrame
John M. Atkinson
On Sat, 6 Jun 1998 00:20:25 -0400, "Dean Klein" <klei...@erols.com>
wrote:
>1) I am intolerant of gamers who don't bathe yet insist on standing next to
>me.
I'd switch "persons" for gamers myself. Gamer, spectator, general
public, if you can't take a shower on at least a daily basis, and
again following any strenuous physical activity, go away.
>2) I am intolerant of gamers who argue with the game organizers over
>trivial bullshit.
Absolutely--one of the best ways of handling it I've seen was the
organized listened for a brief moment, then said, "That's the way I
want it to be. Do you want to play or not?" Guy shut up. I'm fully
convinced he would have thrown the guy out on the spot had he not--and
more importantly, so was the guy who was complaining.
>3) I am intolerant of people who like to wear their "uniforms" to
>conventions.
Really! This is worst among WWII Germans, but anyone can be bad.
>4) I am intolerant of sore losers.
True--nothing more annoying than whining. . .
>5) I am intolerant of unpainted armies, especially in tournament games.
At a con, I sorta have to agree. It's not like you and your buddies,
who do things your way (whatever that may be).
>6) I am intolerant of people who criticize the paint jobs of players who
>DID put forth the effort to paint their armies.
Damn skippy!
>7) I am intolerant of people who fail to grasp societal norms of behavior
>when out in public.
Yeah. . .
>8) I am intolerant of having my wife look at me funny when some guy named
>"Wolfsblood" (or any other fantasy pseudonym) wearing his Special Forces
>T-shirt, asks me if I want to play a game of "Teenagers from Outer Space"
>with him over at his mom's house. (And I don't care HOW tactically
>proficeint he is)
ROFL
>9) I am intolerant of being lumped into the same category as 1-8 simply
>because I like to play historical miniatures.
Heh.
I guess this was a bit of a long, drawnout me too post. . .
Jay
Christopher Lee Frame <fr...@essc.psu.edu> wrote:
>But in addition to painting, do you HAVE to play on some sort of realistic terrain also? We
>play on carpet and I hate it because it looks stupid but I'd rather play on carpet than not
>play at all.
We try for terrain as "realistic' as possible. It's getting better,
and we're about to start building a terrain set for a specific battle
(it'll be for demo games at conventions).
The best minis look like crap on lousy terrain.
Jay
Christopher Lee Frame <fr...@essc.psu.edu> wrote:
> (and if some absent minded, overweight
>gamer steps on the paper miniature counters, they don't CRUNCH and no one
>WHINES - and it seems to be the overweight guys that normally crunch stuff
>up - 1/72nd scale plastic cav don't stand a chance against 250 lbs of
>angry wargamer).
That's why you play on a table, or use metal figs. Trust me, the 250lb
clod will only step on a 15mm pikeman _once_ (if you play on the
floor, shoes MUST be removed).
>I have seen some extremely impressive paint jobs, but I go to wargame, not
>admire the figures. For those of you that INSIST on playing only with
>people that paint figures, that's fine, but I'm more open minded. I just
>don't have the time to sit and paint figures, nor am I willing to pay
>someone to do it for me.
I think you are making a gross assumption. Not one of the posters has
said he would play only with people that paint figures. The deal is
that we won't play with unpainted figures. If the game is all you want
you're welcome to play, but you have no more right to say that it's
the game that's the most important than I do to say it's the model (or
the history, or the simul-bloody-ation). To each his own.
>Generally, I use figures painted by OTHER people (alot of THEM insist that
>figures MUST BE PAINTED or you ain't playin' in my sandbox) and return
>them after wargaming since alot of the people I wargame with have more
>figures than they can possibly manage in a single wargame.
Most minis gamers have more figures than they can manage in a single
game. Besides, my 1:2400 scale warships won't look good with my 15mm
Napoleonics or my 25mm Colonial British. They still have to be painted
to get on my board because MY hobby involves three things: history,
toy soldiers and a game. If you play in MY sandbox you'll use painted
figs. BTW, I probably won't play in your sandbox for the very reason
you don't paint figs: my time is limited, so I use it to get _all_ of
the experiences out of a game that I want, including admiring a
well-painted, historically accurate, figure.
Hubert Klak
Christopher Lee Frame wrote:
>
> Of course a clear coat over the figures after painting is complete will keep them "finished"
> for a longer period of time. Anyone have experience with that?
I have some Napoleonic Prussians protected this metod. They are over
four years old. I think over the time cover becomes less elastic and it
is droping off.
I have a bunch of Dilger's
> Artillery units from the American Civil War that I want to protect (yes they are plastic
> 1/72 figures - I painted them while waiting for information to download from the net).
>
> CFrame
Jim P.
I have used Testor's Dullcote clear fixative over a Testor's Glosscote for
as long as I have painted any kind of miniature. It protects them without
altering their "freshly painted" look. In my experience with plastic, they
still wear off, but last longer.
On metal--in my case everything from my DBM mini's to my modern micro
armor--has gone virtually untouched since finishing--almost twenty years in
some cases.
My Two Cents,
Jim
Andy Kern
Conor O'Dowd wrote:
> I can't believe what I'm seeing here!!!
>
> Surely the only worthwhile answer is another question (the Irish way!)
>
> "Does your opponent mind?"
>
> Now let's get back to the serious stuff.
Iv'e just got back from Roll Call 98 (British Open Wargames
Championships) at Dunstable. An excellent weekend with well over 100
simultaneous wargames going on in variety of periods. Not an unpainted
figure in sight, except on the trade stands. The organisers put a lot of
effort into the convention and hope to recoup some of their losses by
charging the public admission. The need for painted armies is, therefore,
obvious if you are putting on a show. I must admit that some of the games
looked superb, particularly the 25mm DBM and it is these that will attract
new blood to the hobby.
That said, there is a significant difference between competition games and
friendly/club games.
I will always allow a player to use unpainted figures to start with, but
agree with the principle that anyone who wants to continue the hobby
seriously must make the effort to paint their figures. I don't care how
good a painter they are, or how much detail is included, the end result
will always look better than bare metal!
--
"Excrementum Tauri Eludat Cerebra"
Andy Kern
Clay Smith
In article <6lagko$e4d$1...@winter.news.erols.com>
"Dean Klein" <klei...@erols.com> writes:
* snip awesomely great post, except for the line below, which is too
good to snip *
> Bottom Line: When you go to a convention that is open to the general
> public, you're not at home in your underwear anymore.
You summed it up well! (We've got 'em on the run - send in the cavalry
to chase 'em down and kill 'em!)
Steve Burt
Hubert Klak <hk...@wa.onet.pl> wrote in article
<3579A0...@wa.onet.pl>...
> Christopher Lee Frame wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I generally use plastic for figures (1/72), but metal for armor
(1/285). I have
> > ALOT of problems with paint sticking and so do the grognards that I've
played with and
> > against that insist on painting their thousand 1/72nd scale plastic
figures (they get
> > worse looking after every game).
> Well, I have exactly the same problem. After some time all painted units
> look only "half" painted, no mater how carrefully you move figures. I
> have tried many different primers and sealers (including white glue as a
> sealer - till now it is best of all I tried, but it is not perfect -
> paint still go away, but a little bit slower).
>
Plastikote spray acrylics, paint with acrylics, and then use ployurethane
varnish, the paint does not come off.
You can stand on a figures and not have any paint flake off (try that with
a metal figure....)
Properly primed and finished, plastics are more durable than metal figures.
.. and a lot cheaper....