Are you a gaming snob?

[Malebolgia]

@Elbows: So paint the windows and tires and you're set right? Because then it looks way better than most painted cars (personal pet peeve: matt finished modern or sci-fi cars...they are silly. Almost all cars are superglossy, apart from pimpy rides and such)

[Elbows]

Yep, easy enough to fix up.  I'd prefer a bit of matte coating simply because the paint on those cars is so horrific normally.  But, paint up the tires/windows/wheels, or add a little grime, do something to remove the comically sized chrome wheels all toy cars have. 

[FramFramson]

Well, I'm certainly guilty of weathering my toy cars and in some cases (but not all) toning down the gloss.

2SNOBBY4U

[obsidian3d]

Um...maybe?

I play games with different groups of people. Some insist on fully painted and finished figures, others do not. My preferences is to play games with fully painted figures, but I don't insist on it from my opponents. Luckily, the folks I play with most regularly are pretty good at trying to get their figures painted before putting them on the table.

I too have been known to field figures that are only primed, but generally that is when I'm trying to learn a new game, or simply try out something a little odd in a one-off game. Currently I'm much more likely to only put painted miniatures on the table for myself to use. Scenery is far more likely to be unpainted, but I'm working on that.

[Captain Blood]

Yes.

It's my familiar refrain. (Sorry if I've bored you with it before... )
Miniatures wargaming is an inherently visual hobby. We want it to look nice. We want to represent little men on model terrain. if we didn't want that, and it wasn't visual, then we would all just play with chits, counters or board games. But we don't, because the visual impact appeals to us. Once you accept that basic premise, it makes no sense to me for miniatures wargamers to claim 'it doesn't matter what it looks like' - because patently it does matter what it looks like. Otherwise you wouldn't be into wargaming with miniatures at all.

If what people mean when they say, 'it doesn't matter what it looks like', is 'I don't have the time / interest / money / ability to paint figures well and/or make good-looking terrain, so I'm quite happy to put up with less', then that's a different matter entirely, and perfectly understandable. But let's be honest about it.

Otherwise it's rather like saying 'I'm an artist - I enjoy painting pictures. But it doesn't matter what the pictures look like, because the important thing is the process of painting. Not the picture you end up with'.

Well, I suppose that's a school of thought. And maybe if you're regarding art as therapy it's fair enough. But for me, in a visual hobby, it's just odd to claim the aesthetics don't matter.

I'm sure that makes me a snob, at least in some people's eyes

And it's true, that we all have different levels of what looks 'great' or not. So we all have to set our own bar, I guess

[Modhail]

So we all have to set our own bar, I guess

I prefer my bar set at 42 inches, personally, gives a comfortable lean both when standing and when sat on a barstool. 

I have to say I really like how this thread has generated rather nuanced and mild responses, despite the somewhat provocative title. Many other forums I visit would have had to have mods get out the riot gear 4 replies in...
I'm not surprised to see the high amount of responses with people who prefer visually pleasing painted miniatures and crafted terrain, it matches what we see in the various threads on this forum. We (yeah, generalising here) tend to take (deserved) pride in our miniature craftmanship and "play it painted" attitude.
Which had gotten me thinking, I once heard the LAF be referred to as "elitist" when discussing wargaming forums with some mates. Knowing the LAF as a generally friendly and accepting bunch, this naturally surprised me, and I asked him to elaborate. He had construed the number of threads showing fine wargaming craftsmanship (and projects of impressive/insane size) and the mock "rockstar status" of certain members, as LAF only accepting the "cream of the crop". As a result feeling unwelcome due to his (in his eyes) lesser talents and his preference for playing the game over modelling. I tried to dissuade him from this conviction, but to no avail.

Similarly, back when the local gaming club was still active, a few of us held ourselves to the "play it painted" maxim, and we found that a few of the newer members were somewhat intimidated out of asking us for a game because they hadn't finished painting their armies or felt their painting wasn't up to our standards. (This one was easily remedied, we invited them for game, problem fixed.)
Has anyone else encountered similar adverse reactions to our "gaming snobbery"/striving to make our games a visual feast? And how did you respond/deal with it?

[Rhoderic]

I prefer my bar set at 42 inches, personally, gives a comfortable lean both when standing and when sat on a barstool. 

I have to say I really like how this thread has generated rather nuanced and mild responses, despite the somewhat provocative title. Many other forums I visit would have had to have mods get out the riot gear 4 replies in...
I'm not surprised to see the high amount of responses with people who prefer visually pleasing painted miniatures and crafted terrain, it matches what we see in the various threads on this forum. We (yeah, generalising here) tend to take (deserved) pride in our miniature craftmanship and "play it painted" attitude.
Which had gotten me thinking, I once heard the LAF be referred to as "elitist" when discussing wargaming forums with some mates. Knowing the LAF as a generally friendly and accepting bunch, this naturally surprised me, and I asked him to elaborate. He had construed the number of threads showing fine wargaming craftsmanship (and projects of impressive/insane size) and the mock "rockstar status" of certain members, as LAF only accepting the "cream of the crop". As a result feeling unwelcome due to his (in his eyes) lesser talents and his preference for playing the game over modelling. I tried to dissuade him from this conviction, but to no avail.

Similarly, back when the local gaming club was still active, a few of us held ourselves to the "play it painted" maxim, and we found that a few of the newer members were somewhat intimidated out of asking us for a game because they hadn't finished painting their armies or felt their painting wasn't up to our standards. (This one was easily remedied, we invited them for game, problem fixed.)
Has anyone else encountered similar adverse reactions to our "gaming snobbery"/striving to make our games a visual feast? And how did you respond/deal with it?

To be honest, I have on occasion, in private conversations elsewhere, referred to LAF as a daunting community because of the generally high standards here - though I don't think I've used, and wouldn't use, the word "elitist" (seeing as that word has a negative ring to it whereas I only mean to say "daunting" in a more neutral sense).

Actually, to be completely honest, it's part of what drove me away from LAF for 5+ years. The Lead Adventure Meetings were a new phenomenon back then, and I kind of had the feeling that there was a "cool kids' table" syndrome going on.* But still, after spending some time away from the hobby and a few years in some other wargaming forums which weren't quite as comfy or inspiring as LAF, I grew to feel that ultimately I'd rather be a LAFer than not be one. This place is my home for better or for worse. My own persnickety tendencies in regard to the hobby also grew stronger during my time away, and to some minor degree so did my skills and patience as a painter and terrain modeler. Those were also reasons for my gravitating back here. I'm still an underachiever, but I'd rather hang on to the dream than effectively lower my expectations of the hobby.

* Remember, the first big Lead Adventure Meeting (which took place in Germany, but had a few LAFers from other countries too) was an invitation-only event that happened in secret. A few days of peculiar silence in the forum were followed by the sudden, after-the-fact announcement that many of the "rockstar" LAFers had convened for a gaming extravaganza. I know they meant it as a fun, positive surprise, and in a way it was, but from my underachiever's perspective it was also a somewhat daunting jolt that made me realise I'd been flattering myself

[tin shed gamer]

It seems odd to me that some people view this forum as the haunt ,and preserve of an 'Elite' I don't remember an entrance exam when I joined.
Joking aside its not a point of view I'd come across .But hind sight it does explain some of the odd slightly embarrassed looks I've got when I mention to people the should join.
I hovered in the shadows of a fair few forums before I joined LAF and I joined Not just because of the standard of the work on the forum(I won't lie it did play a major part,while I'm being honest I only buy one magazine because of the quality of the work inside((OK a fair few LAF members have written for it!so it might feed into the 'elite' thing a bit more than I  intended.))
It was the approach to the hobby and to each other ,that people on here have.That made me want to join.
The only thing that put me off joining for so long was dyslexia.Not worrying if people would like what I do.More if people could read what I'd written,with out wondering what colour crayon I preferred .(but that's my hang up,and the more time I spend on LAF the more It gets classed as 'NMFP')

Elbows. Did know what cars you ment . I just don't have any 

Jeff .Pm sent.

Captain Blood. I agree that the aesthetics of hobby is important.Non more so than a display game.The point I was trying to make with my pet hate. Is display games where time ,effort,and money have been ploughed into a table(regardless of the skill level ) figures painted scenery made and dressed etc .Then right in the middle of all that effort sit straight out of the box toy cars.
It's that lack of flow,and continuity of aesthetics that sticks out like a sore thumb,and leaves me wondering if they ran out of time.Or just don't care.
Now if those sorts of pet hates(and it is down to personal taste)make me an elitist hobbyist Snob.Then may be there is something to this idea of an elitist sub culture,or may be I just likes what I likes .its all getting a bit worrying have I joined a cult without knowing it?

[Too Bo Coo]

It seems odd to me that some people view this forum as the haunt ,and preserve of an 'Elite' I don't remember an entrance exam when I joined.

Hold up.  You got in without taking The Exam???

[Too Bo Coo]

Captain Blood. I agree that the aesthetics of hobby is important.Non more so than a display game.The point I was trying to make with my pet hate. Is display games where time ,effort,and money have been ploughed into a table(regardless of the skill level ) figures painted scenery made and dressed etc .Then right in the middle of all that effort sit straight out of the box toy cars.
It's that lack of flow,and continuity of aesthetics that sticks out like a sore thumb,and leaves me wondering if they ran out of time.Or just don't care.

I totally understand what you mean.  For my post apoc games I try to at least give the cars a wash of brown ink.  It makes them look like they've been sitting out for a bit.  It's not a huge effort but makes a difference.

[CriticalGeek]

I would say that I am a wargaming snob.  I've bought a $50 terrain book (Battlefields In Miniature by Paul Davies if you are wondering) because I want my game to look great.  I have probably played fewer games than I can count on two hands simply because I don't like to play with unpainted miniatures or an incomplete battlefield (and I've been in the hobby on and off for 15 years!).  It sounds crazy, but there it is.  I am a solo wargamer partly due to my location combined with my inability to overcome my laziness to drive 45 minutes to the nearest shop. 

To address the "elite" status of LAF, I will say that part of the reason I joined is so that I can get better at the hobby.  Conversing and learning from my fellow LAF members can only be a good thing in my eyes.  I think I can accomplish an average tabletop quality, but hopefully some day that will change!  The other reason I joined is that LAF is simply the best forums that focuses on Historicals rather than it being a sub-forum side show.

[warlord frod]

I have to admit that one of the things that drew me to become a frequent flyer here was the noticeable quality level not just of the painting and such but the conversation. I also like the fact that nearly every conceivable area of interest is covered. All this challenges me to improve my own skills and broaden my own interests (Even though that last one often puts a pinch on the ole wallet  ) If that is elitist so be it. 

[Mr. Peabody]

Totally.  That said, I'm happy enough when people put in the effort and don't criticize the result.

This.

I've always seen this forum as friendly place where one can participate, improve and expand their options.

[Too Bo Coo]

I'm very pleased to rub shoulder with the likes of Captain Blood, Bugsta, Stone Cold Lead and others who are real artists.  I do my poor best to play at it, but there is simply so much talent that one would have to work to not improve their game as a LAF member!

[Too Bo Coo]

This.

I've always seen this forum as friendly place where one can participate, improve and expand their options.

  Not to mention I've made some wonderful real life friends and the opportunity to talk to game publishers like Karl from Crooked Dice, Richard from Too Fat Lardies, Richard from Otherworld Minis, Rich from Dead Earth Games (lots of Richard's here!) and too many more to name!