Player Stereotypes.

[Gorgoff]

I'm a know it all and I play Thousand Sons. I'm also a Ravenclaw.

 

 

As for stereotypes in my area, I see a lot of overweight white males with long hair, their arms folded and resting on their ample guts, and a look of permanent disapproval on their faces.

The Neckbeard.

[MegaVolt87]

 

I'm a know it all and I play Thousand Sons. I'm also a Ravenclaw.

 

 

As for stereotypes in my area, I see a lot of overweight white males with long hair, their arms folded and resting on their ample guts, and a look of permanent disapproval on their faces.

The Neckbeard.

 

 

To be fair half the dudes that fit that description are just introverted fat dudes with resting  face, otherwise are completely average/ basic in every way once you talk to them. 

[lhg033]

 

 

I'm a know it all and I play Thousand Sons. I'm also a Ravenclaw.

 

 

As for stereotypes in my area, I see a lot of overweight white males with long hair, their arms folded and resting on their ample guts, and a look of permanent disapproval on their faces.

The Neckbeard.

 

 

To be fair half the dudes that fit that description are just introverted fat dudes with resting  face, otherwise are completely average/ basic in every way once you talk to them. 

 

 

To be fair, after 18 months working from home and on again/off again levels of doing exercise plus being middle aged I fit in to this category without 40k. 

....Maybe not so much introverted (more that I am equally comfortable in my own company as I am with other people so I might just be doing my own thing whilst in a public setting)

...but those two are some of the few armies I dont collect

 

I have to many armies to fit one particular niche for a single stereotype quite often including options for different themes within each of these. General stereotypes for wargamming I fit entirely!

[ShibeKing]

I don't know any women that play 40k personally, but the few that I've shown the minis to have all liked the look of the Tyranids.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I have had two GF both whom won major GTs. One likes daemons the other elves in space. They are both wonderful people and highly intelligent but otherwise very different.

[Noctus Cornix]

Never met a Space Wolf player I liked.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Depends on the edition.

[Redcomet]

Last night on Hang out and Hobby they had a very fun chat about this very topic. About what armies people with certain character traits play.

 

Nick Bayton, who is a real stickler for rules, straight lines and who loves spreadsheets = Ultramarine player

 

Black metal and viking fans = space wolf player

 

Louise Sugden, who is very chaotic and spirited = goblins and tzeentch

[Bryan Blaire]

I think the “danger” in this comes from assuming that because someone plays a certain army, you already know certain things about that person.  You may, but you are equally likely to be wrong, because stereotypes are very broad generalizations, they aren’t universally applicable.

 

For instance - I have a Space Wolves force, and will play them, but do not enjoy black metal.  If someone assumes that I do simply because I have Space Wolves on the table, I will at the least give them a weird look, if not get offended, depending on how they address that to me.  Similarly, I have Tau, and while I enjoy some anime, it’s mostly a very select few, and only a couple of those actually involve mecha - I enjoy the robot aspect of Tau because of my enjoyment of BattleTech, and came to mecha anime through that game as well - I certainly didn’t come to Tau because of my enjoyment of a few anime.  If someone wants to do a deep dive of more modern anime with me, they are going to find me very off put by the conversation.

 

To me, it’s much more interesting to understand how and why someone got into an army than to try and apply some potential qualities to someone because of the army you see them using on the tabletop.

[Ace Debonair]

I only really got into collecting Dark Eldar after starting a career in retail.

 

...I'm sure the two events aren't linked, right?

[Magos Takatus]

What attributes would you attach to a long-term Adeptus Mechanicus collector? They only recently released the army in 7th edition so they can't be collectors of the army before that unless they did huge army-wide kitbashes. I merely add this qualifier to counter the person that thinks it's funny to mention the WAAC players that flooded to the codex once it turned out that the new codex was really powerful. :p

 

I think it would be really interesting to see what people think of the people to play/paint/collect this faction. I know what I like about the faction but stereotypes are typically used to label and categorize other people, so I'd like to see what people think.

[LemanPuss]

I like space wolves because they're cooler than I'll ever be, they have doggos, and I can't grow a beard... awooo!

 

I also like orkses for their gubbinz and wotnotz

[Orange Knight]

Tau and Eldar players tend to be Meta-chasers, in my experience.

 

I say this because no matter what, you will run into someone collecting an Astarter army out of love. Even if the faction is in a bad place, or their chosen chapter is underperforming, you will find a person playing that faction at your local club or gaming store. (Obviously this can be applied to most factions to a lesser extent)

 

When Tau or Eldar are in a bad state they simply vanish from the tabletop. I have not seen a Tau army deployed in about 2 years lol, and it's the same with Eldar. When their new books drop, they will be all over the place. I see this cycle repeat every edition as their codex books drop in and out of vogue.

 

Where are the Eldar and Tau players running armies built to honour the lore? I have never seen an Ethereal deployed as a HQ, but I have seen an Eldar airforce more times than I care to mention over the years. These are just some example of always going for the options to win the game, and never to play to the lore.

 

Of course, I expect someone to tell me that they are a lore focused Eldar player the moment they read this post, but we both know that it's not as common.

 

Edit: For some reason, some sneaky typos always seem to escape me. Oh, and I wanted to mention that I typed the above through the lens of humour and mirth, and no offense is intended.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Orange Knight

[Magos Takatus]

I have been abandoning my Eldar army for some time, mainly because the Adeptus Mechanicus have their own army now and Orks are my lazy day painting army. With the prospect of a new Avatar of Khaine model I'm looking forward to jumping into the army again. There's still "new" models since I last worked on my army like the awesome Jetbike models so I'll be taking too long assembling my army to care about the meta. I haven't owned an Eldar Codex since before the Fall of Cadia stuff so I don't even know how the faction are doing background-wise, it was just too much to buy every codex for each army I collected. I started an Ulthwé army but I'll be painting Jain Zar and some plastic Banshees up because I love the models, so that's steering a bit away from Black Guardians and Seer Councils but with models like that, cane you blame me? :D

 

I suppose the Tau/Eldar soup days tarnished the factions in the eyes of some. I simply haven't seen an Eldar player for a long time and the only active Tau player I know is relatively new to the hobby. 

 

I think the fact that many people play a collection wildly different armies makes it hard to nail down stereotypes. Orks and Admech are kinda chalk and cheese to each other. Then add Eldar and marines to that and my dominant trait is probably that I can't settle down on one army. :p

[Noserenda]

Metachasers obviously play whatever army by definition but are you seriously suggesting literally nobody likes the Eldar or Tau fluff or models? Thats a serious stretch :D 

 

[Halandaar]

Metachasers obviously play whatever army by definition but are you seriously suggesting literally nobody likes the Eldar or Tau fluff or models? Thats a serious stretch  

 

You might even say that branding every player of two different factions as a shameless meta-chaser could be considered "toxic". If only there were a topic to discuss that kind of thing...

[Orange Knight]

Oh, and I wanted to mention that I typed the above through the lens of humour and mirth, and no offense is intended.

[Valkia the Bloody]

Well, so far, I had a Fantasy Empire and Dogs of War army, Dark Elves, Ogre Kingdoms, Death Guard, Loyalist Thousand Sons, Blood Angels, Necrons and there are a few units unpainted Space Wolves floating about.

Currently, my main army and obsession is my Night Lords army.

 

Now I dare anyone to deduce

- my age

- profession

- taste of music

- favorite color.

 

:p

 

All I want to say-

yes, there are a few stereotypes, the "typical" Ork, Marine, as well as the military Imperial Guard players do exist, as do the effeminate (likely gay) Eldar players.

I have met them.

But I also have met people who do not fit the stereotype at all.

I know a girl who loves her Orks and plays the violin. And does an awesome absolutely crazy colorful paintjob on those Orks.

And me personally.... I also do not actually fit into a neat box (I am more likely to shred any boxes people try to put me in).

[Scribe]

Never met a Space Wolf player I liked.

 

I almost want to play Wolves to break the stereotypes (or lean into them for the laughs), but I just dont think I can play Imperials with a straight face.

[techsoldaten]

This question comes up every so often, restated in various forms.

 

My experience is stereotypes don't apply. Sure, you might find some superficial characteristics amongst players of a specific faction, but they seem to break down at scale.

 

40k players tend to be mercurial and come from a variety of backgrounds. The group that gathers at my FLGS has included scientists, engineers, researchers, accountants, LEOs, artists, musicians, students, teenagers, and many other professions. Beyond the love of the game, the only thing they seem to have in common is the ability to relate to other players.

[gideon stargreave]

I don't think stereotypes apply either, at least not to army choice, or even game choice. But someone mentioned that hobby preference has associated stereotypes and I'm inclined to agree

 

WAAC = you know the type without me typing it out

Campaign/ narrative player = normal Joe, often bald, wears a black coat and reebok classics, calls other players nerds.

Modeller/painter - you might call them a hipster I suppose

[techsoldaten]

I don't think stereotypes apply either, at least not to army choice, or even game choice. But someone mentioned that hobby preference has associated stereotypes and I'm inclined to agree

 

WAAC = you know the type without me typing it out

Campaign/ narrative player = normal Joe, often bald, wears a black coat and reebok classics, calls other players nerds.

Modeller/painter - you might call them a hipster I suppose

 

Yes, I know many people who could be best described as painters, competitive players and casual players.

 

Wonder if these categories represent stereotypes - characteristics conforming to a fixed pattern - or simply a reflection of how much time people are able to devote to the hobby. You can be a prolific painter, that might not leave a lot of time for games. You can be a competitive player, that might mean your army has the bare minimum number of colors applied per model to get by tournament rules. You might be a casual player, that might mean you never devote enough time to min / maxing your list for tournament play.

 

I know casual players who put massive amounts of work into the appearance of their army. I know some great painters who sometimes play competitively. I have played casual games with competitive players getting ready for tournaments, who just want to know how my army would react to their list.

 

So maybe there are stereotypes, but there's could be a lot of overlap. Seems like some of it is a function of someone's free time to devote to the hobby.