I am currently catching up on writing some The Old World battle reports and my army composition got me thinking about “Stillmania” and the spirit of the game. Stillmania is a classic article from White Dwarf about how one of the hobby greats, Nigel Stillman, played Warhammer back in the day. Below is a list of Stillman’s thoughts on how to lay in the spirit of the game.
I realize I have followed a good number of these points, often to my detriment, throughout my gaming career. While I don’t name my characters and regiments, and I don’t use gloss coat I rarely change my army. While I don’t paint just 2,000 points I have always painted to whatever the editions army size was, plus a few hundred points more, and rarely, if ever change my list. Since The Old World game out I have only used two variants on my Nurgle Daemon army, which is really what got me to think about this topic!
If you’ve been reading my battle reports you’ll know this is my typical Nurgle Daemon army, of which I have only made a few changes.
While I can’t say I don’t have extra units I can say I have a custom carrying case, and the extra units come from different editions of the army!
My opponents all know what I’m going to bring to each game, in fact we even skip the “what does this unit have” phase of the game because it’s always the same! I certainly don’t care if my opponent knows the exact composition of my army!
Over the years I have painted most of my armies to just about 2,000 points, unless the editions standard game was more than 2,000 points, before moving on to my next army. This has allowed me to paint more armies, but the problem is when the points value changes, or the editions meta changes I’m stuck behind the power curve. For example, my Tomb Kings were painted when the army first came out to 2,000 points and then never updated. At this point if I wanted to use them I probably don’t have enough points, and even if I did I don’t have any of the cool new toys. While not caring about this is peak Stillmania I think updating the army to have the new units would be acceptable twenty years later!
Do you subscribe to Stillmania principles? I’d like to think at the very least we are all focusing on having fun whether we win or lose!
-Wachtmeister
The Wachtmeister's Patrol 
I remember that article from WD, and there were parts of it that never really sat well with me then, and still don’t today, and other parts that fully resonate, but perhaps for different reasons than intended. For example, the part about “do not possess extra units.” Come on! GW makes a bunch of cool models, but some of the armies have point requirements structured in such a way that it’s impossible to fit one of each unit type in a single army. So he’s expecting us to buy only enough models to create a set-points-sized force, and never even try some of the troops in the codex? Or that we luck into models, and then “that’s that,” no chance to experiment. It’s like inheriting your older brother’s shoes, but he wears a size 10 and you wear a size 11: sorry, you just have to squeeze your feet in. His intention (I hope) was to encourage narrative fun over math-hammer, but to me it came across a little douchey. He has access to every model the studio can produce, so it’s easy to say “use what you want” when any want can be easily met. The “gloss varnish” bit is of course overly dramatic, and the idea of satisfaction as a result of “generalship,” “tactical moves” etc. is wishful, since it’s a game that relies upon the rolling of dice. Bring that same list a hundred times, roll the dice a thousand times, and “generalship” is just another name for the “Bell Curve.” Always thought that article came across as a little pretentious. I like to instead re-read it more broadly as a call to wargaming for fun. Stillman found fun in those things he listed, but each player needs to find fun in their own ways. For some, fun might have come from winning at any cost, for others it came solely from painting their models to a higher standard than their opponents, still others just wanted to get drunk with their friends and play with toys. I always brought the same Tyranid list to my weekly game night, over and over and over. Only one army for the entirety of 2nd edition 40k. But it was for 2 important non-Stillmanic reasons. 1) I only had enough money to buy those models. 2) Those were my only painted models. But I definitely had fun. That said, Rick Priestly / Andy Chambers were more my speed…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have to say despite only painting to a certain list and not changing anything was more due to not liking making army lists, and wanting to jump on to other projects. I think some of his goals were a little silly, such as three coats of gloss varnish, but I do like the idea of fighting with what you have. I often find I’m very competitive with my friends who know every aspect of my army even when they spend ages updating their army lists and reading all about the current meta!
LikeLiked by 1 person
OMG, this can be renamed Wachtmeisteria! Although, I dare say an optional unit or two does occasionally appear, but only because the models are cool! Always a gracious opponent, Wachtmeister, will help bury your dead — even when you are trying to raise them back. Great article, I hadn’t seen this issue before, thank you for sharing this.
LikeLike