Washing Away

As a not awesome painter, I will admit that the introduction of washes was a boon. However, I learned through trial and error that it is not so simple as slapping Devlan Mud all over a model and expecting grand results. So I decided to make this post to help people who are just starting out in painting or who haven't yet learned how to use washes to their best effect.

A small anecdote: when I was an undergrad many years ago, I took Art 101 because I thought it would be fun. I got a C - which is annoying because it dragged down my GPA for a class I didn't need. So, I am not a great artist. But I did pay attention on the more science-based aspects of the course (I just did not implement them well), such as color theory, tone, etc. Also, I have learned how to paint within my limitations. Even if I learned how to blend paints well (I don't see that happening, too impatient) I just cant "see" how to highlight a model. This is where washes have helped me greatly - it gives me information about what areas of the model should be highlighted. There is still some judgement needed, especially on large flat areas (for this I suggest looking at really well painted models and studying the placement of shades) - this is something I struggle with.

Any painter should learn a few things about color theory. I am no expert, so don't take anything I say here as gospel. Basics: there are cool and warm tones of most colors. For instance, and orangey red is warm, while a blue red is cool. Yellow with a grey base is cool, while a brown base is warm. The important thing about tone: using a cool toned wash on a warm toned color (and vice versa) may make your model look dirty, and not necessarily in a good way. Another thing about color theory, colors have opposites, which when you are talking in strict terms, means that if you mix green with red, blue with orange, purple with yellow, you get black. With paint, you more often get an off shade of black brown. But color opposites can be useful when looking at washes, as you can use an opposite color to get a different shading effect than if you just chose a brown or black wash. Thanks to Ratty on the Wyrd forum by the way for pointing this out - I had learned it in that art class, but hadn't thought to apply it in this way to mini painting.

I am currently using the no longer current GW washes. When these run out, I will likely move to Secret Weapon or Vallejo washes, but I haven't used these brands yet. So the rundown on washes I currently use, and what colors I tend to use them on:

Badab Black: pretty much anything, except yellow or orange! Depends on the effect I want. Vallejo has a soft grey wash that I want to get next time I order from an online retailer, as it is not carried locally - I think this will be neat on white, but we'll see.

Devlan Mud (dark brown): I tend to use this on brown, green, red (when I want to keep a warmer tone).

Ogryn Flesh (medium reddish brown): Use this as a first wash on flesh, pinks, reds, browns, dirty grays, purple, pink. I also use this to warm up something that I used Devlan Mud on already.

Gryphonne Sepia (tan): This is a pretty light wash color, but can be useful if you are painting a warmer white/beige tones, and is also useful for paler flesh. Can also be used on yellows and oranges. Possibly even pastel greens and blues, but I have not tried it on these colors, so it may not work as expected.


The following are more situational, and I tend to use these as glazes as much as washes (I use them as a second wash over items that had a first wash of brown or black, to bring the main (related) color back out.

Baal Red: Good for oranges, pinks, and even greens.Mostly used as a glaze though.

Leviathan Purple: Doesn't do a whole lot for shading, unless the base is lighter. It is useful on yellow though! (Again, thanks to Ratty for this tip) I also use this over greys, you can see this in my Tina crew, where I used it for the fur trims, or over a light blue. Also I use this on reds occasionally.

Asurmen Blue: This particular shade of blue I have found to be quite potent - be careful if you are using it over a first highlight as it can really obliterate the work you put in. This does deepen existing blues, which is nice if you start with a blue gray, as it makes it more blue. I have not tried this over orange yet, but should work similarly to the way purple on yellow works. Can also be used on greens or purples to shade a bit and alter the base tone.

Thraka Green: This works well over lighter, olive greens, which is what I did with the Ophelia crew. It doesn't do much for anything deeper than a mid tone though. Again, try using it over red instead of black and see what you think. Also can be used over grey and brown to give a mossy look, nice for woods and stones.

Now to the important stuff. Washes should NOT be viewed as a quick and easy way to finish a model. They are tools and are best used with precision, as you would any paint. Using the guide above, and your own experimentation, determine what wash will best serve your needs for various areas of the model. Washes are not generally one shade fits all, and if you try to use them this way, your model will often end up looking dirty and sloppy.

What washes do: I mentioned above that the first wash gives me insight into what areas of the model need more attention, which is why I wash after completing the base colorings. I need help in order to see what the model wants. Washes can provide an uneven shading, as they tend to sit in the crevices. This does not mean that if you just use the biggest brush you have to dab it all over that it will seek the recesses out. I will discuss this further in a moment. Washes can bring back a color and deepen/enhance/alter tone, as described above, this is often called a glaze. Washes can be used to fix minor mistakes, such as excessive highlighting. It won't completely cover them, but a few washes can deepen the base enough to where they are less noticeable. Washes can provide some "faux blending" by softening the distinction between highlights/base colors, but they will not provide the same effect as if you did a proper blend in the first place.

What Washes Don't Do: They won't save a sloppy paint job. They won't provide the sort of natural effect that an expertly blended paint job will convey. They won't turn your model into a prize-winning masterpiece without a high level of skill.

Viscosity. Think about how water forms droplets on a window - it doesn't move as a sheet, it forms droplets that run along the path of least resistance, or where pushed by force. All fluids are viscous to some extent. What this means is, you need to tell your wash where to go. If you just slop a wash all over a painted mini, you will inevitably get staining where you don't want it, where it chose to pool rather than where you wanted it to pool. In general, you want it to gather in the recesses (if being used for shading, I'll talk a bit about other uses next).

What this means - you need to use a properly sized brush to guide the wash into the recesses and thin it out over the flat areas. It is just like painting, except you want it to gather in certain places. Good painters will tell you to only use the tip of the brushes when applying paints, a rule that I often break when highlighting btw, but this is how you ought to use the brush. Washes are different. When working with textured areas, it is often easier to use the flat side of the brush (the bristles still, not the handle) to push the wash into recesses. Using just the tip, it will often suck up some of the wash, which is counterproductive if you want it to stay on the model. If any pools occur on an area where you don't want them, you need to spread them out immediately, as it only takes a few seconds for the wash to start drying and leave a stain. For this reason, it is best to work small areas at a time and move around the model in an organized manner.

If you are using a wash as a glaze, you want to instead make sure that it is spread evenly across the model in a thin layer. Because washes leave a much thinner layer of pigment than paint, you can wash an area multiple times without obscuring details, so as with paint, it is best to use thin layers and build up to the desired tone (wait, I don't do this with paint - but I do with washes!). You want to make sure each wash coat is dry before starting another.

One last thing - it is important to use the proper size brush for the area you are covering and apply washes precisely where you want them, especially when using multiple colors of wash - where two washes meet you want to avoid overlap generally.

So that is my experience with washes. I use them quite a lot - they have helped me have much nicer looking minis I think. But you must use them wisely, not sloppily. I guess, a sloppily washed mini is better than one with no shading or highlighting, but not by much. They are so quick and easy to use, though, that expending a small amount of extra effort is really not asking too much. The most important thing about using washes, or any other painting technique, is to be ready to experiment. Because washes are so thin, it is not too awful when you make a mistake or something doesn't turn out as expected. Just apply a thin layer of paint over it and try again. Note, it is best to try new things on areas that can take a little extra paint, not the finest of details.

As always, questions and comments are appreciated.

How to Become a Mediocre Painter

One of the earlier posts offered up an example of some of the truly horrible paintjobs I am guilty of. I have gotten better. However, the other day while I was set up to do demos at the LGS, someone looked at my models an commented "Wow, these are beautiful" to which I thought "Are you drunk?" On second thought, they were probably talking about the models themselves, not my painting.

Before I forget, I have finished several crews recently, so the page for my finished crews has just been updated.

I have absolutely no business offering painting tips, by the way. I am not great at painting, rather I have developed a systems that works for me with the end result being models I am not ashamed to put on the table. I wouldn't dream of entering them in any competitions though.

So, if you are struggling to get past the stage of painting where you manage to "paint between the lines" as it were, then maybe this will help. Just don't expect anything spectacular - if that is the level you aspire to, then practice, and read tips from people who are actually good painters. If you happen to be one of these good painters, you may want to just stop reading this post now, so you don't get annoyed at all my lazy shortcuts.

I will detail the basic steps I go through. I have a few pictures to help illustrate, but my photography skills aren't great either, so....

Step 0: First thing - clean any mold lines or flash of the model please. I am crazed about mold lines. The best paint job ever will be ruined if the model has mold lines showing all over. Next, you want to spray on a base coat. I used to always use black, but I really hate painting certain colors over black (particularly red and yellow), so now I usually use white or gray, but it depends what I want the end product to look like. If you want lots of bright colors, I would go white, which is what I have done for this marionette. Army Painter has a nice line of spray colors that I have just recently used for Warhammer - where you have dozens of minis with a predominant color. This may be worthwhile depending on what models you are doing, how many, and if there is one color that will make up the bulk of the model's coverage.

Step 1: Put down your base colors. Keep it neat, but don't go nuts fixing every little mistake if it is something that will likely get painted over later. I was particularly fond of the GW Foundation paint range as it suits this method of painting - I have not tried any of their new paints and doubt that I will once I need to refill, as I also picked up an Army Painter paint set last Christmas that I like very much; however, they have adjusted the range somewhat, so not sure how the colors I have (which are cleverly named things like Yellow and Blue) correlate to the newer ones. But if you were asking me where to start, I would suggest picking up an Army Painter starter set. About five years ago I splurged and got a Vallejo set with like 70+ paints, but they have not aged well, which could be my fault for not using them often enough and not storing them properly, but still, I can't recommend them as they have caused me a great deal of frustration, though many other people swear by this line. Please don't use the kind of cheap paints you buy at large chain retailers - I did this for many years, and my results were pretty much not good. Some people have better results with cheap paint, but I would strongly advise against using these if you can afford a nice starter paint set at your LGS (which you should be able to find for about $40). Brushes, however, I almost always buy these on sale at the craft store. Go for Red Sable, not synthetic, and try to get a nicer brand, but don't go crazy. Get a variety of sizes, and make sure they are for acrylic paints. A proper brush cleaning solution is a wise idea also.

So, this is the easy step. Here is the marionette with the basic colors:

Step 2:  Washes. I am actually going to write my next post specifically about washes, so won't go into super detail here. I will caution you: don't think that you can just slap a brown or black wash all over the model willy nilly and expect good things. They don't work that way. I will go into much greater detail on this tomorrow. I am using GW's old wash line - as these run out I will likely replace them with Secret Weapon washes. On this model, I used Badab Black wash on the blue, purple and red areas, Devlan Mud (dark brown) on the green, Ogryn Flesh (medium reddish brown) on the flesh toned face and the brown wood, and Leviathan Purple on the yellow (thanks to Ratty for a suggestion on the forums a while ago for this one).
Then, I did a second wash to bring the colors back up a bit - green wash on the green, blue wash on the blue, purple on purple, red on red.  I left the yellow alone, though GW's new paint line does have a yellow glaze that I might pick up for this sort of use. Be careful to avoid any pooling where you do not want it, as it will leave a stain. Washes don't naturally run exactly where you may want them, you need to guide them there. Be careful if you are using multiple wash colors to keep them where they should be - it's just like painting, be neat.

Really, with a little tidying up in spots, you could probably just say done after this step if all you want is a painted mini. The photo makes it look like there is a little more contrast than what you see in person, btw.

Step 3: Highlight. The good thing about using this method is you can often get away with using the base color as the highlight color, as the wash will deepen the tone on all areas of the model. Since this model is small and lots of texture, I am only using a single highlight. For larger models with larger flattish areas, you will probably want to do two or more highlights. I may do another post next time I paint a model like that.

For now, go back and pick out any areas that need a little pick me up. Raised areas are usually where you want to hit, but also try and think about how the fabric or whatever would react in real life, where it would be shaded and where it would be reflective. If you make a mistake, like I often do, and go a little overboard on the highlights, you can use another wash coat to dull it a little bit, then try again (I call this the magic eraser way of using washes). Be very careful in this step - since you are almost done you don't want to make mistakes. This is especially true if you have mixed colors, as it can be really difficult to match a color that has been covered in layers of washes.

My models have what some would call a high contrast, cartoony style. I personally like this, which is good because I can paint this way. I don't blend colors well, which you need to do if you want a more natural looking effect. So it is a matter of taste - if you don't like this look, then try to find a method that gets you the result you enjoy.

The finished marionette:

Adding Step 3.5: Details. If you struggle with having sufficient brush control to pick out really small details (for example, the stitching on the wicked dolls, or eyes - I suck at painting eyes!), you need to make a decision weighing the added impact of a well executed detail vs. the likelihood you will screw things up trying to achieve that detail. In the case of eyes, I have just stopped trying. It has never turned out well for me, so usually I just wash and highlight the faces, and maybe use a colored wash on lips or eyes to give them some definition. With the wicked dolls, I decided to not pick out the stitching at this time - I have in the past used a pin to apply paint to really small details, but in this case I just wanted to get them finished so I could work on other things. I figure, I can always go back later and try to finish these little things, but if I am not feeling confident about something, I generally think it is better left alone for the time being. It's your choice though.


Step 4 & 5: Varnish & Base. I have been using a brush on varnish lately, but spray varnish is fine, just be careful and make sure to test it on something before you spray your model, every time.You can varnish before you base, or after. It depends. I like to do one coat before the base, as it makes it a little bit easier to fix any mishaps (though not always) that may occur when basing. For these models, I tried an experiment. I filled in the base with modelling putty (before painting began) and then painted it brown, the lips of my models' bases are color matched to their faction. Then, I used a trendy nail polish designed to give a "crackle" effect. The idea I had in mind was peeling paint laquer on a wood floor. The results were mixed, but oh well. I often use resin bases, but these I usually need to order and I didn't have any on hand for these models.

That is pretty much it. I have pictures of my recent models on the Finished Crew Pictures page. And I will try to do the in depth discussion on washes tomorrow.

Addendum to the Angry Nerd Post

I wanted to add a few things, but decided to make a new post so anyone checking this semi-regularly would not miss it. First, I want to clarify that none of the types I spoke of were reflective of any one individual or event. I have been lurking on gaming forums and blogs for quite some time and these are an amalgam of instances I have noted recurring often. If someone thinks I was directing a comment at them particularly, please make yourself a nice cup of chamomile tea and listen to Carly Simon before getting all offended. Second, I wanted to be clear - I am not saying that people should not be upset when things don't turn out the way they would like. It is okay to feel disappointed and hurt when your expectations are unmet. However, there is something to be said for behaving in a dignified manner. And I must admit, much of what was written is in fact directed at a specific person - my teenage self. I was a tremendous asshole when I was younger. For all you who rage and ramble, bite and bait -  I have been there, done that, and probably was far more horrible and grotesque in the act. This sort of thing is unsustainable - if you do not learn to quell the fires raging inside, you will be consumed by them. But doing so requires sacrifice, and worse. It is easy to forget that youth should be both pitied and exalted for dancing upon the edge of the knife.

I will offer a quote here, from a critical essay written by T. S. Eliot on the subject of Shakespeare's Hamlet. "The intense feeling, ecstatic or terrible, without an object or exceeding its object, is something which every person of sensibility has known; it is doubtless a subject of study for pathologists. It often occurs in adolescence: the ordinary person puts these feelings to sleep, or trims down his feelings to fit the business world; the artist keeps them alive by is ability to intensify the world to his emotions. The Hamlet of Laforgue is an adolescent; the Hamlet of Shakespeare is not, he has not that explanation or excuse."

 I will offer my thoughts on one more type, which was omitted from the first post - the opinionated, know-it-all blogging gamer lady. Lived experience, age, should provide an ever-growing repository of understanding, of compassion and acceptance of the foibles of men (and women). Yet you use this gain as a means of forgetting, a way to abolish the memories of a youth spent raging and railing. You divorce yourself from truth, deny the legitimacy of young emotion, forgetting a time when passion trumped reason, and depth of care was measured by magnitude of response. Wisdom should mean appreciating such fervor, not dispensing stupid platitudes about the superiority of learned apathy. You grow old and forget the horror of becoming Prufrock, as you too measure out your life in coffee spoons.

Entering the Hobby, and Why I Don't Hate GW

While I eagerly await any news from what delights this GenCon brings, I will while away the time with another post. This is about my 20-year relationship with the miniature gaming hobby - which, by the way, is the longest relationship I have had. Really, aside from reading, this is the one constant thread in my interests over the years. I wrote a different version of this elsewhere a while ago, and will no doubt revisit this topic in the future.

Two things prompted me to think about this: (1) recently, I was told that because I have never played, nor have any particular knowledge of, RPG's that I have somehow messed with the order of the universe. I know pretty much nothing about how RPGs are run, what people do there. I don't see myself getting into it either, mainly because I am a tactile person, I like holding my minis, I like painting and collecting my minis. And the RPG thing just seems very social, which freaks me out a bit. I'll get to (2) in a bit.

My younger brother received the Heroquest  game and a few expansions for Christmas one year, probably 1990 or 91. My brother got much more cool toys than me - so even though I am a few years older, I stole his toys a lot over the years (and dismantled several of his Lego creations to make my own, sorry about that). This game was somehow affiliated with GW, and inside the box was a tiny advert for Warhammer and 40K. My boyfriend at that time was British, and had played Warhammer in its earlier incarnation with friends there before moving to the States. So I came to understand that models were put on a table and stuff got blown up with magic and such. This was not too exciting. But those space marines, and the promise of a future ruled by "grim darkness" and war, that sounded awesome. Trying to find the minis became a challenge, which is it's own tale. I think I managed to order/buy Rogue Trader from the Waldenbooks in the mall eventually.

Point is, I didn't learn about the hobby from friends or enter into it as a natural progression from RPGs. It was luck and advertising that got me into it.

(2) The second point which prompted me to write this, I am meeting a number of people who are starting their adventures in miniature gaming with a game system that is produced by someone other than Games Workshop. This is just crazy to me - it's like skipping beer and pot and jumping straight into smack.

I think it is great, and really shows that the hobby is diversifying rapidly, but at the same time, it creates differences in the understanding of how things work. Particularly in regards to how customers are treated by various gaming companies. For any of you that have played GW games for more than a few years, I am sure you can agree that the way the company functions has, um, evolved over the years. Back when I got into this in like 1992, I was on a road trip and decided to make a detour of several hours to hit the GW store in Arlington, VA (there were only a few in the States at that time, mostly centered around their HQ in Baltimore/Glen Burnie). I was thoroughly let down as the store had a really pathetic selection in stock (in retrospect, they were probably just about to shift to 2nd edition). So I wrote GW a letter, letting them know what a disappointed teenager I was. And their response? They sent me a $20 gift certificate to use through their mail order. Seriously - can you imagine that these days? I loved GW, up until several events signaled a change in their operating practice - particularly the closing of their forum and the descent into suckiness of White Dwarf.

Luckily, I had a serious stash of minis to work through. I moved to Orlando, FL for a while and met some of the nicest gamers ever at Rhubarb Games (sadly they have closed) and at about the same time, new Eldar and Dark Angels codexes were released, so I started purchasing stuff for a while. Then I moved away and again put new GW purchases on hold. About a year and a half after I moved, I received a random email from Rhubarb announcing Malifaux and its exceeding awesomeness. I was hooked immediately, and so put the pointy ears and the power armor away for many years.

Two different themes here at this point, I will resolve them individually. First, it is hard to understand the frustrations of non-GW veterans when reacting to the customer interactions and general information relay of other companies. Because everything they do is so much more involved, faster and generally more gracious. Waiting less than a year for an update or a model fix or an FAQ? That's nothing, as I am sure any of you who played Dark Eldar since 3rd edition can agree. And at least Wyrd, and maybe PP too (I have no idea about them), has the guts to maintain a forum where people can discuss, and criticize, their game and business practices. GW hasn't done that for what, 10 years now? So, when I see people getting upset at Wyrd for not doing this or that at the beck and call of some of its customers, I get annoyed. So do others obviously, because I guess we have learned patience from having seen much worse.

Second thing, though, I have decided I am not really mad at GW anymore. I am willing to give them some of my money, luckily not so much as the bulk of my main armies have already been purchased. (***oh how this statement was proven false***). They lost a lot of business from me, because I am a collector, not the type to finish one army and then stop. If they hadn't made me mad, I would probably have about 6 40K and at least 3 WFB armies at this point, instead of 2 and the beginnings of 2. (**now that is more like 5 and 3**)

I never quit GW, I just needed a break. I didn't hate them, they just disappointed me. And they do make some really nice models. And Eldar were my first love, which just doesn't leave you.  And because I have met some nice people in the area who play GW games exclusively.

That said, I will be picking up the new 6th edition box next month (I hope). I will finish painting my Ravenwing, probably strip my plastic troops just to get them uniform (and because I am a much better painter now). I will get the last few Eldar boxes I need to feel complete there and finish painting up the machines and possibly strip and repaint the troops. I really like some of the High Elf models, so will probably get that going. And I have always wanted a Lizardmen army, but that would be well down the road.

So for any locals, you may see me showing up at DL without my Malifaux stuff on occasion. Please be nice.

The Lonesome Death of the Angry Nerd

I mentioned this in my last post, but wanted to look at an aspect of gamers which I find perplexing in more detail. Specifically, the enormous emotional investments some make in what should be a hobby. Yes, it is a hobby that requires a tremendous outlay of time and money, as well as developing social connections. But it is just a hobby - and really, if this is your only hobby, you need to expand your horizons a bit. I say that with love. Because if you are pouring all of your available discretionary energy into just one thing, you are bound to get your heart broken sooner or later. And it will make you a more interesting person, rather than a one note tune, if your list of interests doesn't end after 1. - Wargaming.

In browsing various forums over the years, I've seen repeated incarnations of a few flavors of the angry gamer nerd stereotype. Going to look at a few in depth - hope nobody takes this personally.

"I'm right, and you're just an idiot Fanboy"

I was going to do a whole separate blog post on my issues with the "fanboy" epithet, but then it kind of blew over and I moved on without having written on the subject. So, to sum up my main thoughts: I don't care if you call yourself a fanboy, but I really get annoyed when calling someone a name becomes an argumentative tactic. Anyone who does this, you need to grow up. Calling people names to make your point is what you do in grade school. Assuming you are old enough to drive a car legally, you should have developed a much more sophisticated rhetorical repertoire. If you haven't, then I have no time for you. And if you ever happen to actually meet me and try and engage me in some sort of name-calling hissy fit, it will end with you sobbing in a corner, I promise.

What I find so incredibly weird about people who engage in this sort of dialogue, though, is that they will spend months and even years on forums dedicated to some game/company towards which they feel such obvious disdain. The world is so full of choices, and yet, they can find nothing better to do but hang around someplace and spout their disgust at this and that. If it is so awful, move on. No need to stay and attack everyone who disagrees with you. You're the idiot who can't seem to find something more enjoyable to do with your time.

I get that there are valid criticisms to be made, and there is an appropriate way to engage in debate. I have no issue with this. But if finding fault becomes your singular occupation with the hobby, then something has gone wrong for you, and for your own sake, you should figure it out and fix it. My main problem with these sorts of criticism is that I just don't care about a lot of the issues. Few things are so annoying as to get me pissed off, and if something does get me angry to that point, I have options on other ways to invest my time and money. Case in point, when I finally got fed up with GW a few years back, I didn't waste time ranting on the internet. I just quit giving them my money and gave it to Wyrd instead.  Corporations don't care how mad you are - they care about profit, and I denied them any from me for several years.

Also, the way criticism is framed matters. There is never a reason for allowing your opinions about some game/company to devolve into personal attacks against some other gamer. There may be many worse things to call a person than "fanboy", but this is specifically used to say "You can't see the truth because you are blinded by your devotion. Therefore, I must be right and you must be wrong." Which is stupid. First, there are differences of fact, which are decided by presenting the best well-supported by evidence argument. Then, there are differences of taste, opinion, aesthetics. There can be no right or wrong here. I like chocolate, but that doesn't mean you are wrong for preferring vanilla. It's just dumb; anyone who cannot admit that views different from their own are valid, is just petty and sad. 

One more thing here - if you are in your early twenties, you are probably not absolutely right about most things. Sorry, but the one thing you will certainly learn as you get older is that you know a lot less than you thought you did when you were younger. So if you're young and angry, take a breather. Patience is not a virtue, it is a learned survival skill. Save the anger for things that matter, like people starving or dying in the streets and the fact that the education you've invested tens of thousands of dollars in will likely only get you a slightly better than minimum wage job once you're done with school.

"I quit" (throws minis into a flaming bin in epic youtube video)

A confession, the terms Nerdrage and Ragequit are fairly recent additions to my lexical understanding - I tended to ignore slang, even when I was a teenager, and the profusion of words not properly defined in a standard dictionary are just one thing I do not care to expend time in learning. However, having watched a few of these episodes play out recently, I wanted to probe the phenomena.

Having studied media for a time, I get the motivations behind creating a spectacle. We are all, in the end, just minute specks in a chaotic world. It is nice to feel that we can somehow defy our destiny and make a grand statement for which we will be remembered. Staging a ragequit on a gaming forum does not qualify. I mean, really, you're competing against people who set themselves on fire and stand down heavily armoured enforcers to make a statement about something important. Throwing a fit worthy of a teenage girl who has just been stood up for the prom in a relatively less populated corner of the internet is just not on par with such noble defiance.

I get that people are pissed off when things don't go their way. I get wanting to quit something and feeling bitter because you feel jilted by some company/game/group and wanting to express your outrage. But I would urge anyone contemplating this sort of feat to consider the aftermath - because there won't be one. For a few days or weeks, people will talk about you. Some will miss you for about five minutes, more will mock your pathetic display of indignance. And then you are forgotten, and nobody cares why you left, or that you were ever there. If you still feel the need to stage some righteous final stand, by all means go ahead. Just give me a heads up, please, so I can get my popcorn.

"I love this game. But I don't like this about it. Or this. Or that. Or these. Or that. And don't forget ..."

Yes, you get these people everywhere. And in general, I don't care. If you are so dedicatedly dismayed by the various aspects of a world around you that does not meet your expectations, I pity you. What annoys me is when this sort of disgruntled faux constructive critique pervades my leisure time reading venues. Because it is boring and predictable, and I am quite certain I am not alone in this observation. At least the Ragers provide some mildly amusing entertainment. But the grousers, Yawn.

In some educational text I read at some point, there was a discussion of the ratio of  good/bad feedback teachers should strive to maintain. the reason is obvious - children who hear nothing but negative feedback will just stop trying, while obviously, some criticism is needed to help them grow and not keep doing things incorrectly. The minimum ratio was 3:1, 5:1 is better, optimal you should be trying for 9:1 or better. The point I am making with this, forums aren't really any different. You should be aiming for at least 5 positive things to every one negative. If you fall short of that, you are probably contributing to an unhealthy environment. At best, people just ignore you. Worse, they think you are a whiny loser.

My reason for posting this: please be aware that you are a member of the gaming community. Like any citizen, we each have a responsibility to make this hobby a better place. I have met far more nice and helpful gamers than the types listed here. I remember forum members and game store denizens whom I have not seen or heard from in years, but I recall them by name because of their excellent contributions to creating an awesome environment. The boring, insulting, rude, obnoxious ones - after a few weeks, forgotten.

So in closing, remember what somebody's grandma said: "It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice."

Anyway, that's it for now. I have a week or so before classes start again, so will try to post a bit more before things get hectic again.

Busy, busy, busy

I should be used to this by now, as it is how my life goes. Teaching always end up requiring more time than I think it will. Even though I have taught the class before, and had things planned out, it never runs smoothly as one might hope. And then there are farm animals and a household to look after, all while trying to schedule time for demos, gaming and painting. So this blog ended up at the bottom of my list of priorities. Someone who responded to my survey (I have a feeling I know who) suggested I try and just set a goal for posting once a week, which is probably a very good plan.


***edited a bunch of stuff out***

Actually, this kind of leads back to gaming. I've taken a break from posting on the forums of various places lately. Because people have been getting all worked up there too. I just don't get it - if everything is so very awful in this hobby, why not try something else? At first, I wanted to jump into the fracas, but I didn't because I couldn't think of a way to respond that wasn't filled with vitriol. So I just edited what I was reading, but still I would catch a bit of back and forth that in the end, just turned so utterly BORING. I guess people don't get that if you choose to stand and shout incessantly, it all ceases to have any meaning whatsoever. Because most everybody just wishes you would pipe down so we could have some peace and quiet, instead of the nonstop babble. Ugh. I guess people think being exceedingly opinionated about everything makes them more interesting, but really, it just makes you the person who has an issue with everything all the time. And that isn't interesting at all, just a one-dimensional caricature. A bloviating bore. And it's election year, there's enough of that going on already, everywhere else.

Ophelia and Lady J crews

I am trying to get one crew from each faction painted so that I can run some demos with a few options. First out the gate: Lady Justice and Ophelia. I actually started the Lady Justice crew ages ago and finally got them done (it's been a busy couple of years). Ophelia's crew got finished in record time (for me) at just about two weeks. Lucius and Guild Guard are nearly done, and I've started Rasputina. After that, moving on to Collodi and then Seamus. And finishing off Puppet Wars somewhere in between.

Pics are posted on their own page - Finished Crews, so that they aren't clogging up the main page.

My First Real Malifaux Game

So, this past Monday, I finally played my first game of Malifaux against an actual person. It went pretty well, I think, if a bit slow (which was totally my fault). I got creamed, but that is to be expected, and I don't tend to care much about winning anyway, so it was all good. There were a few things my opponent did that really helped me get a handle on what was going on, so I wanted to point them out here.

I have already mentioned that I work in education, so I am aware that people learn best in many different ways. For me, I cannot learn by reading alone. I have read the rules manual numerous times, and it just doesn't click. I learn best by repetition and by writing. For my classes, I need to recopy my notes and problem sets several times over the course of the semester, else it won't stick.

My opponent talked through everything that was going on, before he drew cards he would state what he needed to make the ability work. This was invaluable to me. By the end of the game, I felt like I had a vague understanding of what was going on. We didn't play a particularly sophisticated game, just a shared strategy and no schemes, which was good, because I can't handle too much information all at once, I lose focus (because ADHD).

I need to get used to the noise of a game store at night. I don't care for loud, busy environments in general. So, it was difficult for me to concentrate (probably due to this, I forgot my opponent's name, as well as the name of the person who introduced himself while we were setting up, so I apologize for that - I am pretty bad with names in general).

My plan this weekend is to go through the rules manual and the cards for my starter crew (Lady J is what I think I will concentrate on for now) and write down relevant information. Then reorganize and rewrite. We have another game set for Monday, so hopefully I can have enough of a clue at that point to not spend hours looking at my cards each activation.

On a related note, several people have expressed interest in the game, so things are looking up at the local level (the scene here was pretty dead when I started this - deader than a twice resurrected guild autopsy (could not resist)). If you are in Austin and looking to play Malifaux, feel free to contact me through this blog, the Wyrd forum, or centexwar (my user name is pretty much the same in all 3) and I will let you know where we're at.

Dice, Decks, Doors, and Math Part 2

The word distribution is bandied about a lot, and it is not always clear what is intended by its use. When we are talking about probability distribution, we are looking at the likelihood of a number of outcomes for a certain experiment (the set of all possible outcomes is called the sample set). Distribution is also used in statistics to describe the shape of data, often in a graph. Most people are familiar with the normal distribution (bell curve) and skewed distributions, which have a “tail”. There is also the uniform distribution, which is what I will be focusing on when I start talking about dice, at first. It is important to note, there is a statistical theorem, the law of large numbers, which states that after a large number of experiments are performed, the outcome should be close to what was expected according to the theoretical probability. There are many misunderstandings regarding this application of statistics. One that I have seen come up often is the expectation that previous outcomes have an effect on future outcomes in independent events. I will discuss this in the dice section. Note, I tend to use experiment and event interchangeably, and this is not entirely appropriate. An event is defined as a subset of the sample space, but event is a lot easier to read and write than experiment. It shouldn’t be too confusing I hope.

Understanding the difference between independent and dependent events is essential to being able to properly apply probabilities in a gaming environment. Two events are independent if the outcome of the first does not affect the outcome of the second. An event is dependent on another if the outcome of the first experiment affects the conditions of the second. In general, when we are looking at dice, we are considering independent events. When we are drawing from a deck of cards, without replacing cards drawn, we will be talking about dependent events. In either case, the probabilities of all possible outcomes should add up to one (we express probability as a ratio of number of events/size of sample space).

Basic Scenarios with Dice

Dice are pretty easy to talk about with regard to probability, largely due to the fact that we are considering independent experiments. Here I will refer to six-sided dice, but the methods can be applied to other types. Say we are rolling one die. The probability of rolling any of the six numbers is 1/6. What if we roll one die and get a 4. What is the probability of getting a 4 if we roll a second die?  Well, it is still 1/6. If we are rolling two dice, the probability of rolling two 4’s is 1/36. So many people assume that the chance of rolling the second 4 is somehow lessened. IT IS NOT! This is one of the most common misconceptions I have seen. If we continued rolling a (fair) die many, many times, it will be the case that the number of 4’s rolled/total rolls will approach 1/6, but the die does not care what you just rolled.

Say you are rolling 5 different colored dice. There are 7776 unique outcomes, with respect to the color of the dice and the numbers given. However, since what we usually care about is simply how many x’s are rolled, many of these outcomes are in effect the same. How did I arrive at 7776? Imagine that you write five blanks on a page to record each roll. There are 6 possible outcomes for each die; we multiply these together (6*6*6*6*6 or 6^5). If anyone asks, I can post a diagram to give a better idea of why (or you can look it up).

In a lot of games, we are not concerned with one specific number, rather we want to know how many of a certain number or greater we can expect. This is easy – we just take the probability of rolling the least number we want (say we want 3 or better, then there are 4/6 outcomes that will work) and multiply it by the total number of dice rolled. Note, this is just an expected outcome based on the probability – it is possible to roll all 1’s and 2’s, just less likely. So this method works for the purpose of estimation, but it is not entirely accurate mathematically. I will write about this idea again with more detail, specifically the notion of using a subtractive method to gain a better idea of the actual theoretical probability distribution.

Another situation that comes up in wargames is when two dice are rolled and we want a certain total (or better). Assume we use two different colored dice. The sample space is the same as the previous examples, where we want a certain number, but the way we calculate the probabilities is different because we are asking a different question. There are still 36 possible arrangements, but with this question a red 3 and black 5 is the same result as a red 5 and a black 3 is the same result as a red 4 and a black 4, because they all sum to 8. The possibilities for the sums range from 2 to 12, with 1/36 the probability of rolling a total of 2 or 12, while a sum of 7 is most likely as it occurs in 6/36 arrangements. But trying to estimate based only on what one number is most likely is not terribly accurate. A 7 total is only slightly more probable than 6 or 8. And there is a 5/6 probability of not rolling 7. Which again, leads to a topic worthy of further discussion, the most likely range of outcomes.

I’m not going into great detail here, and it is easier to see what is going on with a diagram (maybe I can work on that in future). But the important lesson here is, in independent probability your next roll absolutely does not influence your next. Period. Never.

Cards Are Different, Usually

If we want to draw a card from a deck of 54, then put it back in the deck and draw again, then we are talking independent probability still. However, this is not how we tend to use cards. Recall with the dice, if we rolled 5 different colored dice, there were 6*6*6*6*6 possible arrangements, many of which were essentially the same. If we draw 5 cards from a deck, without replacement, then there are 54*53*52*51*50 possible arrangements, for just the first 5 cards drawn. If we want to know the total possible arrangements in a deck of 54, it is 54! (! is read factorial). The reason for this is there are 54 possibilities for the first draw. Once we have drawn a card, it is removed, so the next draw has 53 possibilities, and so on, until we come to the last card. If we know the first 53 draws, we can be certain that there is only one specific card left. By the way, 54! is a really huge number. This is one of the things that makes talking about probability with cards so much more difficult – what we might draw next depends a great deal on what has already drawn. And the enormous number of possible arrangements makes it very difficult to calculate on the fly.

We can rather easily calculate the probabilities of getting a certain type of hand at the initial draw, but to talk about the possibilities for gameplay in general, it is near impossible, as so much depends on what cards have been drawn, played, are being held, etc. What is possible, if you are any good at card counting, is to estimate the possibility of drawing a certain card that you know has not been drawn yet.

The intial draw: How many different 6 card hands are there given a deck of 54 cards? Well earlier I said there would be 54*53*52*51*50*49. But this is not exactly the answer to the question. This is the number of arrangements, where order matters. In our hand, we generally don’t care in what order cards are drawn. So, given 6 cards, there are 6! (6*5*4*3*2*1) different arrangements, so we want to divide out this number. The way we write this mathematically would be 54!/(48!6!).

What if you are in game and you have drawn half the cards (27). You know for a fact that you have not drawn the Little (Red) Joker – I use big and little joker because I’ve played spades a lot, and in Malifaux Black trumps Red. For those who play Malifaux, you should be familiar with the red and black joker. There is a 1/27 chance that the next card drawn will be the Red Joker. As your remaining deck dwindles, if you have still not drawn it, the chance of doing so will increase. What if you want to know the possibility that it will be among the next three cards drawn? Well, that would be 3/27. There is also a 3/27 chance that it will be one of the last three cards, or any three cards of those remaining.

That is as far as I am willing to go with the card probabilities at the moment. Because it is entirely situational. Remember that there are 54! different arrangements? Well, let me know when you’ve played that many games. And note, it is far more likely if you could play that many games (you can’t by the way) that you would have had the exact same arrangement twice or more, rather than having each arrangement exactly once.

The main point here: the more cards drawn during the turn, the more cards you are likely to see (shocking!). And as your draw pile gets lower, the probability increases that a certain card will come up. In a game like Malifaux, looking at probabilities is further complicated by the fact that different masters and minions have different card requirements (and that sometimes you want “good” cards and other times you don’t), which influences the percentage of your deck that is desirable (or not). I will try to go into more detail on much of this in future.

Dice, Decks, Doors and Math - Part 1

Warning – this post will be long, and probably quite pedantic. Also, I assume most of you can google, so I won’t be posting links to anything, as I feel you should look for it on your own, perhaps finding other things that you find instructive or interesting on the topic. And, this is not my best writing. I chose clarity over elegance (okay, I was just being lazy).

I had intended this post to be in one piece, but I don’t have time to finish it today, and I had promised to get it posted. So I’m going to slap a Part 1 on it and come back to it in a day or two. Sorry to those of you who have been on pins and needles awaiting this exposition.

Background on Me:        

I have both Bachelors’ and Master’s degrees in Mathematics, and am working on a PhD in Mathematics Education. I have only recently begun to identify myself as a mathematician, but I don’t consider myself a very good one. But that is because I compare myself to others who are much more knowledgeable and capable than I. In relation to the general population, I know a great deal more about mathematics than at least 90%, probably more like 95%. I’m not saying this to brag, but it is important to note, because the way non-mathematicians understand and use mathematics can be quite different from those who have had more training and experience in the subject. I also teach mathematics, currently at the introductory college level, but I did teach high school for one year (and then ran like hell). So, a lot of my assumptions about the general level of mathematical knowledge is based on what I see in my classroom, which may not reflect the composition of the overall population, or the gamer subpopulation in particular.

Background on Mathematics:    

There seems to be a large misconception about what mathematics is, and how it is applied. I don’t offer quotes much, but this is one of my favorites “As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.” (Albert Einstein) Mathematics is an axiomatic system – which means there are a basic set of assumptions (axioms) upon which the body of theorems are built. There are also definitions, which are used in building theory, and these definitions must be precisely stated and applied. Many people have the belief that mathematics is always black and white, right or wrong. This is not the case. There are many areas of mathematics where disagreement can occur, often stemming from the basic axioms and definitions. What is true, and this is the focus of much higher order mathematics, is that once a theorem is proven correctly, it must be universally accepted, but with the caveat that it is only as good as the axioms and definitions upon which it rests.

Background on Statistics:

It is not unanimously accepted that statistics is a subgenre of mathematics. I have read several articles discussing this issue, and my opinion on this is not definitive, but statistics is as much about interpretation as calculation. Stealing from a statistics professor I know, statistics is the study of variation. There are a number of statistical terms that are also words in the general lexicon, but the statistical meaning can be quite different than the commonly understood definition. My point here is, people use the terms of statistics in a manner that is not always correct or, more importantly, precise. Precision of language is of the utmost importance in mathematics!

Background on this Post:

I have noticed on forums, that probability theory is not always correctly applied or calculated. Furthermore, there seems to be a lack of understanding of the different kinds of probability and a misuse of statistical terms. I’m not calling anybody dumb, but it inspired me to write this post as a means of describing some of the ideas behind probability theory and explain some of the mathematics involved in making calculations. I will also offer my opinion on the feasibility and usefulness of applying probability within the context of gaming. I’m assuming a level of mathematical knowledge that has Algebra as a background, but I will try to be as clear as possible for people that haven’t seen this before.

Famous Problems in Probability

Perhaps the most well-known probability problem is the Monty Hall problem. This is based on the television show “Let’s Make a Deal”, where a contestant is given the choice of three doors.  Behind one door is a prize, behind the other two is sometimes a goat (I haven’t seen the show in many, many years). I will refer to the prize as good and the other two as bad. So, given three options, the contestant chooses one. The host will subsequently reveal one of the remaining two doors, which is always going to be bad, as in no prize.  This is important. There is a 1/3 chance that the contestant has the prize, while a 2/3 chance that the host does. There is a 100% certainty that the host has at least one door with no prize. When looking at a deck of cards, probability can be reassessed based on information that is revealed. In the Monty Hall problem, no information is revealed. The host will always have a door with no prize to reveal. After the reveal, the contestant is given the option of trading their door with the one the host still has not revealed. Probability is in favor of the host holding the prize, so according to the probabilities, the contestant should always trade.  This is a contentious problem, and some very well-educated people still can’t agree with this conclusion. It took me a while to come to terms with it. It is natural to say that there is an equal chance that the contestant or host holds the prize, 1/2. This is not however the case, the initial probabilities still apply. As I stated, the important thing is that no information is revealed in this case. Information will be key to later arguments.

For those not convinced of the truth behind the Monty Hall problem, I offer an alternate scenario. Say there are 20 doors. The contestant chooses one, so they have a 5% (1/20) chance of holding the prize, while the host has 95% (19/20). If the host reveals 18 doors with no prize behind them, would you still feel the contestant has a 50% chance of winning?

 

Faux Pas

Another not gaming related, but short, post. This is an example of the sort of thing that goes through my mind in relation to the social anxiety problem. I'll post more on this at some point, but wanted to take a break from more personal stuff.

The other day, I had made a post and ended it with something to the effect of "Perhaps this whole thing is just a type of ego masturbation, but at least I have the balls to admit it.

Don't go looking for it, because it's not there. It's not that I felt too much was revealed, or that my crudeness would be a turn-off for you readers, which it might but sometimes I need to be crude to make the point.

I took it down because it occurred to me that other people, and other bloggers in particular, might read it and think I was trying to be an asshole towards them. Well, I guess I was being an asshole, but that was entirely pointed at me, not anybody else. But I freaked out after a bit as it occurred to me somebody might feel it was directed at them. I'm still freaking out about it.

***The thing is, I know a lot of the reactions I feel are probably irrational. I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty sure that most people don't spend hours replaying a perceived social misstep or phrase that *may* have been taken in the wrong way. And more than likely wasn't. This is why I say social situations can be exhausting, because the post analysis is constant and I don't know how to turn it off. I'm trying to learn.***

So, not to go into detail, but this happens often, pretty much anytime I extend myself a little and reveal some sliver of my true thoughts, my internal monologue. Anyway, I just wanted to apologize if anyone took offense.

The second part of it, was actually sort of me congratulating myself. Because posting like this feels like a tremendous risk. Go back and read the first post. Yes, it was somewhat humorous (maybe), but that kind of is a snapshot of how I feel, not all the time, but often enough. And yet I'm still doing it, which is a tremendous accomplishment even though there's really nothing worthwhile here.

Also, I promised a post on math and gaming, but I want it to be well done so am taking my time with it. I hope to get it up by Sunday.

About Malifaux

Okay, so since it is possible that a few people make their way here from a non-Malifaux site, and perhaps have no idea what the game is about and why it's so cool, I'll post up a few thoughts. Any of you Malifaux people who are here, this should be nothing new, but feel free to add a comment if I missed something important.

The official line is that it is a character-driven skirmish game. What it means, to me at least, is that the stories are an integral part of the game design. Yes, there is some debate on whether the rules may be too beholden to the fluff, but for my part, I'm all for it.

[An aside, one of the reasons why I chose to collect Eldar back in 1993 was their story, with their technology and their fancy clubwear.]

Anyway, there are seven factions in Malifaux that each have their own idiosyncracies. Within each faction, there are about six masters. Probably half of the available models are either unique characters or rare types. A big difference between Malifaux and other games is you probably don't want a whole bunch of models of the same type. Most of the non-unique models have at most 3 different sculpts and, with a few exceptions, this is probably all you would want. My point with that blurb is, if painting is an important part of the hobby for you, this game gives you a chance to put together a really nice crew without having to paint the same model 100 times over.

Instead of dice, duels and such are made using a deck of cards. Some strange debates with even stranger mathematics go on about this. I try to stay out of those, which may seem odd since I'm a mathematician, but I try to steer clear of OPM (other people's math). The point with the deck is, yes there is a lot of random, but there is also a certain amount of control, or resource management as the folks at Wyrd like to say, involved in the gameplay.

Another interesting attribute is that winning revolves entirely around accomplishing the most points from a shared mission and two individually selected schemes. So there may be games where you can win without killing anything, or even more hilarious, games that you win when your entire crew is dead.

I moved away from where I started, so let me go back to the characters and the story. Quite a bit of background preceded the game, and so if you want to get a feel for the sort of characters and environment of Malifaux, you can download the Chronicles online mag and see for yourself. Also, I believe the fluff from the version 1 rulebooks is also available now in electronic form. Like I said, this is what drew me into the game. Plus undead hookers.

I probably sound like a total "fanboy" (future topic there) and Wyrd shill, but whatever. I'm not doing it justice. One last thing to note, the cost of entry for Malifaux is pretty low. Now if you're a completionist collector/addict like me, maybe not so much. In general though, for about $100 (that's full retail) you can pick up enough models to give you a single master force that allows for a bit of variation, an extra set of minions, a mini rulebook, and a deck. Depending on the master you choose, that could be pretty much all you need.

That's just my blurb - if it sounds interesting, then you should go to the official site and poke around. Especially because I've not been a very good writer for the last few days, don't know what's up with that but this is nothing like my usual writing style. It's kind of (totally) annoying me.

So why am I sounding like some kind Malifaux corner-pusher? Well, I figure if you got here from the local forum where I post, you should know that I think Malifaux is the best minis game I've played. So, I wanted to give you  a little background to pique your interest, and state that you should contact me on the forum, because really the worst that could come out of it is you lose a couple hours of your time. And you're already wasting some of it reading my crap, so I know you've got at least a little to spare. At best, this could be your new favorite game. And despite all the crazy stuff in the first few posts, I'm really not that bad.

**Updated to be more consistent with version 2 Malifaux

Evolution of a Mediocre Painter, the first

Moving on to more light-hearted and game-related things. I decided to post a series about the development of my painting skills for a couple of reasons. The first is because I want to really examine how I have become a (somewhat) better painter, mainly so I can stop giving myself such a hard time. I think I am now getting a reasonably consistent tabletop quality, and I think I am fine with that. If I have a really special model, well it's probably sitting way at the back of my painting queue, waiting for a moment when I have sufficient time and  skills to do it justice. But since I have hoarding tendencies when it comes to models, I have such a backlog of what I want to get done and so little time that I am okay with doing acceptable but not awesome work. I have probably reached my apex at mediocre for now.

So I am posting my really old, really, really bad stuff in part to make myself feel pretty good about where I am now. I also hope it will make some of you feel better about your own skills. I can't offer much in the way of advice if you want to produce display quality work, but later on I will give some explanation of what I do now, in case you find it acceptable enough and, like me, get really freaked out when good painters try telling you what you should be doing. They're right, by the way, and I'm just lazy and sloppy. As I post some of this old crap, I can also offer some very good advice on what not to do. And make (hopefully) comedic observations.

So first up, I present a Blood Angels squad, with some really old style Scouts. This may not be the first thing I painted, but was probably near there. I'm thinking around 1993-1994 when I painted it. BTW, I am a lazy photographer generally. In future, I will try taking better photos, but no promises.

Do I really need to add any funny commentary?

The scouts left this photo shoot to audition for a Twisted Sister cover band (thankfully, they left their wigs in the car).

And for those who didn't know, it used to be that your rank as a space marine was determined by the poofiness of your sleeves. Really poofy = cleaning latrines and almost certain death.

Subtitle for this thread "When varnish attacks"

I think the Sergeant was on his way to a Christmas party so he decked himself out in a mistletoe wreath.

Lessons to take away from this:

When people tell you to thin your paint do it. Don't use the .50 craft store kind straight from the bottle and try to get everything done in one coat.

When it comes to varnish, matte is your friend. And don't hold the can half an inch away from the models.

Don't use the "flock" that is really dyed sawdust. If you really feel you must, cover it in glue. A lot of glue. Otherwise, it will keep showing up in your model cases forever. And yeah, I suck at basing. Thankfully, there are now lots of people who make nice resin ones.

I can't paint faces. Sadly, in this I have not really improved.

That's all for now.

Why Now? After this, no more sap

I was trying to decide whether this post was really even relevant . I have decided not. So, short version, one of my favorite pasttimes (browsing a certain forum) was being ruined by awful personalities and it made me mad. Then, I realized, well it's not like I'm contributing anything to counteract all the negative bullshit. Then I was mad at myself. As stated a few posts back, in retrospect, it occurred to me that I was in an altered mood state, more than likely. My plan had been to start getting to Malifaux night at the LGS after spring semester ended (I'd been to busy and had a schedule conflict). So, I actually get geared up to go meet people, only to find it has been dropped from the schedule due to low turnout. Which means finding someone to play a game with would require a bit more effort than just showing up somewhere at a certain time.

Here's the thing that just occurred to me: I'm the type of person who is either all in or out. I don't really move at half-speed. And I think I went a little overboard in my excitement and started making plans that were a bit too ambitious. I've contacted my LGS to see about scheduling a demo or two. Which means I'll be sitting around, at a table, either by myself or talking to strangers, both of which hold their own sort of terror. I've contacted a few people, sort of heard back from one, but it's been about a week since last contact (mine). Posted on a few other local forums, waiting there too. Eh, we'll see.

Anyway, I'm not really sure at this point why this thing got all confessional. I guess a lot of crap was bothering me. But I'm going to put a button on that and just keep it light from here on in, which may be a little bit of a fake, but oh well. I think I've been a little too honest. I'm still considering whether or not I should delete a few of these posts, but haven't decided yet.

Next post will be first in a series, Evolution of a Mediocre Painter where we get to look at photos of really old, horribly painted models. If you don't think you are a very good painter, prepare to be feel better about yourself in comparison.

I keep saying this might be a bad idea. Maybe it is a stupid, pointless idea. I see a few possibilities. Success (I learn to interact with people without needing a week to recover from the terror and exhaustion, I get a few games in, I get a few people to start playing Malifaux around here). Or, nothing changes. Or, I make an idiot of myself and retreat, again, again, into my cave, stigmatized and less likely to venture out again anytime soon.

Why This? Actually Gaming Related!

So I think have mentioned this blog being part of a project, an experiment of sorts. With me as the subject. If successful, anybody who has been watching this will have been witness to an evolution.

The gaming hobby entered my life in 1993. Aside from reading, it has been an important hobby to me for longer than any other. I may do a more detailed post on that at some point in the future, but it provides some necessary background.

Socially awkward is kind of a misrepresentation, or at least, it does not really convey the severity of my social interaction deficit. My social skills, by the way, are excellent if you are basing judgement on outward appearances. It's the internal monologue that's the bitch. That's another subject I want to explore further, at another time.

Why What? Well, due to a confluence of events (which will be detailed to some extent in the next post Why Now?) I have decided that now is the right time to try and overcome some of my isolationist tendencies.

Of course, if you're going to try to become more social, a venue is required in which to interact with other actual human beings. It only makes sense a reason to get out of the house will need to be something I enjoy. I have a few hobbies, mostly quite solitary pursuits. But gaming.....

I collect and paint miniatures. I have spent some time playing these games, but probably in truth, far less than what is required to actually label myself a gamer. Usually I prefer the term hobbyist, as it is more accurate. But I always have the intention of actually getting out to meet people who share this interest. I'm just to scared to do it. Meeting new people terrifies me. So I put things off, always intending one day, tomorrow, next week.

And I browse forums. A lot. Too often. And by browse I mean lurk. In the last few days I have been actually posting. It may not seem like such a big deal to most, adding one's thoughts in a mostly anonymous public space. To me it is, but I was in an expansive mood and it was pretty easy for a few days. Though I have to admit, I was being rather obsessive about checking what comments others may have left in response to things I said. Yeah, I have a lot of issues.

I think I've lost my train of thought at this point, so I'm just going to go ahead and post this. In summary, why gaming? Because I like it, I've always considered this one facet of the stone that is my persona, public or private, and if now is the time, then this is as good an arena as any for me. Let's see if I can make this work.

Preamble

**I decided to remove this post.  Too much unnecessary information.

****And now I am adding it back.


This post is not exactly what I had planned. I had planned to say "I think I've been having some hypomania for the last few days". I'm not going to go into details or add links here, because: Wikipedia. Then I was going to say that I know it won't last.

Now I have to say, I'm sure it was, and I've been crashing down since about 2 hours ago.

A little mania can actually be quite productive for me. Except I've had about 12 hours sleep in the last 5 days, but I'm not tired. And now I've got a bitchin headache.

Most people probably aren't familiar with the feeling of going from an elevated state and then the rapid falling down that happens as it is ending. I can't really think of anything to properly compare it to. One moment you're happy, full of life, unfettered by the cares and concerns of life lived in the shadow of doubt and distrust. And then you wake up, but not necessarily to reality, just the opposite end of freedom. Tired, self-recriminating, and so very alone.

I wasn't going to post all this, not now. But I've decided that since I started this project, I need to stick with it. I knew this was going to happen though. I was hoping it would hold off for a little while longer.

Anyway, since I'm already going into details I was going to leave out, I may as well fill in a few more. I have been diagnosed with: ADHD, Social Anxiety/Generalized Anxiety Disorders, and Bipolar Disorder NOS (this last one, basically means, well I don't really know. Type 1 means primarily manic, Type 2 is predominant depression, NOS - not otherwise specified - is just where you go when your crazy is just a bit too crazy to obligingly fit inside a nice little box.)

My social anxiety was supposed to be the topic of this blog project. My hope was to document the daily progress I was making in an experiment to come to grips with it, while talking about gaming stuff, and my quest for building up a local Malifaux community, one that I would be a part of.

Right now I'm feeling like this was all a really bad idea. But that was kind of the point. I needed to get this out in public, even though I am pretty sure there's not really anyone reading this, but terrified at the thought that someone is. Because now I'm stuck with it. I'm stuck with this goal I've set for myself. I don't like publicly saying I will do something and then not do it. This project is the best opportunity I have given myself in years.


**Originally this blog had the rather unwieldy title of sociallyawkwardgamerlady. After letting it die pretty quickly, I decided I wanted to revisit the goal of having a place to post the random things about the hobby that I enjoy, or the parts that annoy me, as well as write more about probability, mathematics, and a few philosophical issues. And maybe whine a bit when my mood disorder is kicking my ass. I think the title change reflects that intent more, and it is a lot easier to say ten times fast.