A not-so-great beginning to 40k

[klinesmith]

To bad. Painting is part of the hobby. You just sound like you're making excusing to not paint.

I don't mind playing folk who are assembling their army learning to play, or just bought some new models or whatever, I don’t care if only one or two models is painted a month, at least some people are trying. Quit frankly I’m buying crap all the time and my armies aren’t always fully painted but if you NEVER paint; you’re just plan lazy and shouldn’t be part of this hobby. If you just want to game, go play a video game, or a board game.

If you read the previous posts I stated clearly that it is my favorite aspect of the hobby. The difference between my (future) self and many of the painting elitists is that I recognize it as an aspect that I enjoy and by no means assume they should subscribe to my particular mandate.

You are exactly the kind of player I am speaking of when I talk about how I formed my opinion. The bolded proves the point.

[Aldramelech]

That seems kind of disingenuous, Azaghul. What do we say to the people who collect and paint perpetually but never play? That they're not allowed to do that, because gaming is part of the hobby?

Nope. Shout "Your Weird!" poke your tongue out and run.........

You do have a point though. But so does Azaghul.

Those that can/will, do. Those that cant/wont, dont. Its that simple and we aint ever gonna agree, the two sides despite having a common interest and sharing the same hobby are worlds apart.

[Lord Azaghul]

That seems kind of disingenuous, Azaghul. What do we say to the people who collect and paint perpetually but never play? That they're not allowed to do that, because gaming is part of the hobby?

Consider it more of a responce to his, and I paraphrase: you'll all stupid for telling me I should be painting.

However, I would say (and we already know that the starter of this thread could care less):

That all the other aspects of the hobby, IE painting, collecting, building, converting, are must more, ‘part of the hobby’ then playing the game. To focus on the least creative aspect of the hobby is a detriment to his/her own enrichment.
If someone want to show up once a week and talk painting techniques; cool, I’m sure they have something to teach me. We can chat about fluff and what not too.
Some guy who shows up every freaking week, never paints, doesn’t fully assemble his/her models…I’m tired of it, and after a while I don’t want to play ‘those guys’ If you’re not going to paint, at least pay someone else to paint. And if you too lazy to paint, just admit it.

[Nabterayl]

That all the other aspects of the hobby, IE painting, collecting, building, converting, are must more, ‘part of the hobby’ then playing the game. To focus on the least creative aspect of the hobby is a detriment to his/her own enrichment.

Its that simple and we aint ever gonna agree, the two sides despite having a common interest and sharing the same hobby are worlds apart.

I hear what you guys are saying, but it seems like you're responding to a situation that hasn't actually obtained in the thread. As the OP said, he loves painting - this isn't one of those guys who never paints.

That said, I have to admit your guys' attitude (at least as I understand it) confuses me. Like you said, Aldramech, we have a common interest and share the same hobby - what does it gain Azaghul to label somebody "lazy" because he doesn't want to paint, or to tell other people that they're harming their own enrichment? That seems as silly to me as telling people they're lazy because they haven't bothered to learn the universe's fluff, or because they've been playing 40K for twenty years and still haven't learned any tactics.

They aren't lazy. They just don't think that's fun.

Some guy who shows up every freaking week, never paints, doesn’t fully assemble his/her models…I’m tired of it, and after a while I don’t want to play ‘those guys’ If you’re not going to paint, at least pay someone else to paint. And if you too lazy to paint, just admit it.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but where I come from, "lazy" is pejorative. I don't see the point in crossing from "I'd rather not play you, thanks" to insults.

[DarkLink]

Those that can/will, do. Those that cant/wont, dont. Its that simple and we aint ever gonna agree, the two sides despite having a common interest and sharing the same hobby are worlds apart.

Why do we have to disagree in the first place? We each have our own, potentially different, parts of the hobby that we like. If we respect that, there's no need for conflict or disagreement.

They aren't lazy. They just don't think that's fun.

Right. Believe it or not, some people actually have these things call lives, in which they engage in various other activities that are far, far more important, and sometimes even far more fun, than playing with small pieces of metal and plastic.

If someone calls me lazy because I haven't finished fully painting my armies, I'll respond with something to the effect of "you still live in your mom's basement, don't you".

[Melissia]

However, I would say (and we already know that the starter of this thread could care less):

That all the other aspects of the hobby, IE painting, collecting, building, converting, are must more, ‘part of the hobby’ then playing the game.

And unless you apply that definition solely to yourself, you are inevitably going to be dead wrong.

[Nabterayl]

Right. Believe it or not, some people actually have these things call lives, in which they engage in various other activities that are far, far more important, and sometimes even far more fun, than playing with small pieces of metal and plastic.

That's true, but it's not quite the point I was making. It takes many hours to paint an army to even a basic standard. This might lead one to believe that somebody who wasn't willing to put in those hours was lazy.

But it also takes many hours to become conversant with the fluff of the universe. Is somebody lazy who isn't willing to put in those hours? Maybe - or maybe they just don't find it fun. I would be disinclined to call somebody with a brilliantly painted army but no ability to have an informed fluff discussion lazy.

It takes many hours to learn how to play 40K well, and many more to progress from being a good 40K player to being a good tactician. Is somebody lazy who isn't willing to put in those hours? Maybe - or maybe they just don't find it fun. If somebody has a brilliantly painted army but is a terrible 40K player, and whose many 40K games have not given him any tactical skills that translate beyond the game system, I would be disinclined to call that person lazy.

And yet, if somebody has put in the many hours to become conversant with the fluff, or the many hours to become a good 40K player or a good tactician, and does not have a painted army, shall we call that person lazy? I shan't.

[Melissia]

I spend far more time in Dark Heresy than I do in 40k these days. I've GMed games, and I am a player in several. I put a TON of time and effort into it. If someone wants to claim I'm lazy for not painting, I'll point out that they're lazy for not putting hours and hours on end into roleplaying out the fluff and creating stories.

Neither of them are true... you aren't lazy. You're dedicated to whatever part of the hobby you enjoy, given the amount of time you have to enjoy it, and the amount of money you're able and willing to spend on the hobby (technically one is ABLE to spend a lot more money on the hobby if one wants to cut out a lot of things in life like cable TV, internet, phone service, various types of insurance, automobile gas, heating / air conditioning one's home, paying rent, etc, but are you really going to accuse someone of being lazy by not doing this?).

[Lord Azaghul]

I'm glad this generated a lot of discussion but at the end of it all I remain unconvinced of the necessity of a painted army. Arguments such as:

it's part of the hobby
they look good
its insulting to someone who does paint
etc etc

are nothing more than subjective statements attempting (weakly) to be masked as fact. No, there is no rule stating you must play someone if they offer. Yes, you can choose to deny a game based upon whatever standards you have. The simple point and premise that I have found as a new player on this forums and many others now is simply this:

The now labeled Hobby Stalins make the unbelievably and completely unsupported case that the players who are uninterested in painting only have arguments based upon teeth-gnashing and chest thumping. The irony is that these players are so caught up in their own idea of what the game must be that they simply refuse to actually step and look at the whole argument which can be summed up as follows:

You don't like to paint, so don't.

And

You don't like to paint, don't play.

There is absolutely no reason at all to follow the latter crowd. As was stated in a previous page I would love to see a shop where it is commonplace for players without painted armies to refuse to play players with painted armies.

I'm glad I have now found the side of the fence that makes sense, rather than the side that engages in defamation and flaming of the player who chooses to disagree with their philosophy of the hobby. Just because a player states they don't think painting is necessary doesn't mean that they begrudge you for painting. Vice versa, I suppose, but judging from this thread and many others that's not the actual belief on the flip side of the coin.

Here is the attitude I was responding to. The arguement he's presenting is that exact one he's arguing against.

My statements: painting is part of the hobby. If you won't want to paint, this is the WRONG hobby for you.
Painted armies enhance the hobby.

If you don't want to paint: don't. But don't pretend that you have some high and mighty ideal for not painting. Just stick with Mel's statements on that: I don't like to paint.
And that's fine, I won't want to play you after a while, but don't make the argument that people, by asking you to paint, are trying to tell you how to behave when you won't even consider or acknowledge their favorate aspects of the hobby.

Most of my feeling come from playing 40k tourneys where I see the same unpainted, unassembled models time after time, and for whatever reason most of the these tourneys don't acknowledge painting as a part of the hobby, its simply: win, win, win.

And please don't assume that I'm annoyed because I've been losing game, because frankly I don't lose very often. BUT: one of my favorate things about this hobby and the most satisfying, is to play an exciting bloody game with two fully painted armies. It just seems like the need to 'win' gets in the way of very other aspect of this hobby.

[Melissia]

My statements: painting is part of the hobby. If you won't want to paint, this is the WRONG hobby for you.

And that is why we are saying you are being stupid. Don't try and bring my posts to support yours, I don't support your idiotic statements. I have very clearly, repeatedly, consistently, and quite very strongly stated my opinion that:

Painting is nothing more than an unimportant fringe aspect of 40k.

The difference is that I'm smart enough to say "to me" instead of trying to argue the stupidity you're putting in the quoted section of your post.