Gaming Days On Hold

Just had an email from Foundry. They are putting the God of Battle days on hold for a bit while they get “proper gaming days” (which sound fun) organised and dovetailed into their convention timetables. So, until further notice there’s no God of Battles on the 1st saturday of each month. At least, not at Foundry.

In addition, when they start again they require all models to be painted.

This entry was posted in God of Battles. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Gaming Days On Hold

  1. varagon says:

    Do you think requiring painted models adds to or detracts from the participation? Not just God of Battles, but in any game system?

    GW requires it in their official events, but Privateer Press doesnt except in some hardcore events.

    How can Foundry dictate the painting requirements?

    Thanks Jake!

    • Sam Dale says:

      The GoB days have been held at the Foundry shop/warehouse. It’s their house, their tables, so they can say what goes.

      However, as far as getting people playing goes, saying all models must be painted is very bad. I made a push last year to get enough models base coated, washed and based for the GoB days so that I had painted armies when I played, but it’s about the only game I’ve done that for for a while, and most games I play are against unpainted or semi painted armies.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      As Sam says, in this instance the events are at their place. Their house, so their rules. That’s fair enough.

      Whether a requirement for all painted armies is a good or bad idea depends on your aim. If you want to showcase the wargames hobby to the public, such as at major conventions, then fine: you’re a shop window so make it look its best. If you’re running tournaments for well established games with large player bases then again, it’s a reasonable requirement. However, when you are trying to gain new recruits and build a player base (which is what needs to happen with GoB) I think that it is counterproductive. There is a tiny minority of gamers that won’t play a new game without fully painting their army beforehand. All very laudable. The few I have met are almost all painters first and gamers second. Several of them effectively never game at all. For the vast majority of gamers this is not going to happen. If you ask them to spend several months spending money and painting an army before they can play then they are almost certain to be distracted by another shiny new toy before they get it on the table. That’s just what most gamers are like.

  2. El Phantom says:

    This is being discussed on the Facebook group (shameless plug), one thing I’d want to say further is whilst i don’t want to go into a painted vs unpainted debate isn’t there normally a difference between a tournament and a gaming day.
    As far as I am aware GW don’t require painted armies for playing in the store (well that was the case) but do in tournaments and most clubs have no requirement or rules on painting about playing on club days but do in tournaments.
    The reason being that it is accepted that people build their armies, play with them before being fully painted and gaming days encourage this whereas tournaments are the pinnacle of the hobby allegedly and thus people want to see ‘nicely’ painted armies go at it. In other words one is for encouraging the development of an army and the other is the developed army.

    • Sam Dale says:

      I’m fairly sure Warhammer World decreed “at least undercoated” some time ago. No idea if it’s a general in-store decree.

    • Quirkworthy says:

      I agree. Whether requiring armies to be fully painted is a helpful idea or not depends on your aim for the event and there’s no reason events should all follow the same rules.

    • Ben says:

      Privateer Press do not require minis to be painted in their official tournament rules. I don’t think it’s coincidence that they developed a thriving tournament scene in quite a short period of time. Ultimately, it is what it is and Foundry can run their gaming days as they see fit. I just will likely not be at many of them.

      • nathan payne says:

        Jake your spot on mate, no gamer
        Is going to wait months to paint is army up before it hits the table. As you said another game will come along and take your interest away. I’m all for painted minis on the table.. it gets me stuck into them. But to not have a game because some minis are not painted is odd ? How many games would we of had if all games were like this… not many.

      • Sam Dale says:

        Isn’t it one of the optional things that’s in the Steamroller rulespack, but up to the individual TO as to whether it applies?

        • Ben says:

          It’s one of the variant rules allowed to the TO to help tailor the tournament to the needs of the individual community. The standard rules encourage painting but do not require it. There’s a tournament most weekends up in the north east and I’ve only once seen painted as a requirement for entry, and that was only 15 points.

        • Sam Dale says:

          Maelstrom added painting as a requirement after about the first year of running WM/H tournaments. They wanted to put on good looking tournaments, and reckoned that was long enough for people who wanted to tournament to get their first army painted. (There was the odd one they’d drop that requirement, including one one-dayer I remember, where proxies were allowed too, just so people could test unusual and new things out.)

          Personally, I got no problem with painting for tournaments, and I used the aim of playing at them to drive my painting for several years.

  3. varagon says:

    Right- Let’s think in more general terms now and not specifically at the situation at Foundry. So, asking for opinions, do you think having a painting requirement at a mini event- tournamant, game day, league, etc, adds to the participation or detracts from it? I for one wouldn’t attend many if that was a normal requirement.

    Also, if the miniature rules don’t have an official “mini line” I”m not sure I’d ever really be fully painted as I’d be buying more and more and swapping out models for newer cooler ones.

    (I do agree that you have to abide by the store/location rules, though. Does Foundry require Zombicide to be painted if you play it once a month, regularly?)

    • Ben says:

      I can’t see how all-painted can be anything other than exclusive. Those who have painted armies can attend either way, those who do not, can only attend events without a painting requirement. That’s before considering the impact on new players looking to get into a given game.

      At this point we don’t know what Foundry’s gaming days will consist of. Previously you could just turn and play whatever you wanted. It sounds as if they’ll be a bit more organised than that in future so it may be you can’t just turn up and play what you want. Which would make the Zombicide question moot.

  4. thirdxparty says:

    I’m going to disagree with most of you. I worked for GW Retail in the US from 1998-2001 when you couldn’t bring unpainted models to events, including the beginner Megabattles for kids.

    The idea back then was not to sell a game, but to sell and induct the masses into a hobby. I believe that when you clearly make that distinction it alters how people perceive and participate in it.

    There were some people who balked, but when its just one of the “rules of play” then people comply. Some do the bare minimum and others push their limits based upon their level of interest and patience. I feel it was a good thing for the hobby and in the last 15 years I’ve seen a decline in the overall appearance of armies without much of a boost in participation. (I still work in game store).
    Zombicide is a game, 40K is a hobby.

  5. varagon says:

    So, boardgames with unpainted pieces couldn’t qualify for this consideration? Zombicide even has it’s own line of paints coming soon. How about Deadzone and Dreadball? How about Space Hulk and other specialist games?

    I mean, if you want to draw attention to a game that looks great, why wouldn’t these types of games qualify?

    I’m playing devil’s advocate at this point just for the sake of conversation so don’t flame me. ha ha

    • varagon says:

      …and I forgot to mention that if you are making people buy into a hobby, then definitely, the above games should qualify as they are part of the “hobby.”

      • thirdxparty says:

        I think the difference comes, in part, from the optional component that is more ingrained into Zombicide vs 40K.

        Zombicide uses single part models that are color coded for easy board game play. You need zero hobby experience or interest to play a game.

        GW Games require that you glue together at least 10 pieces to build a single space marine and everything comes in grey plastic. Even the “snap fit” models require some assembly and glue for proper use.

        Both look great painted up but GW games require every participant to exercise hobby skills to get up and running because it is not treated in anyway by GW as “just a game”.

        I think its a very clear distinction.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s