In the realm of divination and mysticism, the witch tarot holds a unique position. This deck of cards, adorned with intricate and enchanting artwork, draws on the symbolism and knowledge of witchcraft to offer insight into the past, present, and future. As an individual inquiring of the witch tarot, one must approach the deck with an open mind and a willingness to explore the depths of the occult. Unlike traditional tarot decks, the witch tarot incorporates elements of witchcraft, such as spells and rituals, into its interpretation. Each card represents an aspect of the natural world and the supernatural realms, capturing the essence of spiritual forces that govern our lives. From the alluring High Priestess to the transformative Death card, the imagery and symbolism within the witch tarot hold great power and hidden meanings.
WIL WHEATON dot NET
From the alluring High Priestess to the transformative Death card, the imagery and symbolism within the witch tarot hold great power and hidden meanings. When inquiring of the witch tarot, it is important to approach the reading with a clear question or intention. The cards act as a mirror to our own subconscious and energies, reflecting what is already present within us.
50,000 Monkeys at 50,000 Typewriters Can't Be Wrong
Update on A Study of The Limits To The Acquisition of Polyhedral Gaming Dice By a Single Individual Over Time.
For as long as I can remember, I and my fellow tabletop gamers have argued that it is not possible to have too many dice. It is known. This is The Way. It is only logical. Yabba dabba doo. And so on.
What I think we may have meant is, it is not possible to acquire more dice than any one of us would be happy to own. Obviously, if you can’t open your front door, you have too many dice. But how many dice tips it over from “this is cool” into “dude, you are a hoarder, but for dice” is unknown.
So about 10 years ago, I began a project to find out if it is possible for me to reach a point where I thought, “No, I don’t need that. I have enough dice.” Over the decade, people have given me various amounts of dice at conventions and personal appearances to support my research. (It’s been awesome to receive dice that come with stories of heroic battles, Wheatonesque probability breaking, dice that are almost as old as I am, dice from special events, OG color-them-in dice, and so many others.)
In addition to accepting these contributions, I pick up sets of dice the way I always have. The annual GenCon dice set, for instance, or the occasional “OH WOW THAT IS SHINY I MUST HAVE IT AND THREE OTHERS JUST LIKE IT BECAUSE OF REASONS” purchase from a game shop or random vendor.
Since the project began, I estimate I have collected a few thousand dice. Maybe around five thousand? I haven’t looked too closely because this is one of those very scientific studies that are about vibes, not numbers. These studies are very popular among think tanks.
The study remains ongoing. I did a vibe check this morning, and again just now. After measuring the vibes, I do not yet have too many dice. Looking to the future of the study, I suspect I could have two or three times this many dice, and still feel like there was room for more. If I acquire dice for the rest of my life at the rate I have acquired them the last decade, I will likely approach some value of “okay, maybe this has gotten out of hand” around 2060.
But now that I have all these dice, what do I actually do with them? Mostly, I just look at them and think about all the games they represent, all the hours of collaborative storytelling and strategizing, all the time spent around tables making memories with friends. I feel good about my game room being the place these dice live, now. I mean, from one point of view, it’s all just hunks of resin or metal, right? From another, though … I don’t have to tell you. You get it. For me, it’s humbling, and it’s an honor, to sort of keep watch over these polyhedral symbols of time well spent and remembered.
Okay, that’s nice, Wil, but what do you do with them? Looking at them isn’t doing anything.
Sometimes, I pull out a couple fistfuls and see how badly I roll random dice when there is nothing at stake (quite badly, as it turns out). If someone needs dice for some reason, I pull out what they need and let them keep it. It’s a version of paying (rolling) it forward.
Last week, though, I found something new (and obvious) to actually, physically, deliberately do with them. I was playing Galaxian in my arcade, and I had this idea to sort some dice into shapes and colors, and then use them to lay out a simple 8-bit sprite. (I had this fun idea about stop motion animation that keeps pitching itself to me. It’s getting a lot of support in the room, but I’m not sure it can pass a full vote.)
Because it’s what I’d been playing, and because it’s incredibly simple, I assembled a Galaxian guy, and I gotta tell you that I really, really like how it turned out.
My next attempt will be a slightly more complex sprite. It’s bigger, with four colors, and if it works … well, maybe I’m gonna make a lot of these things. I guess we’ll see.
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- More
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
Wheatoning.
anonymous asks: What were the rolls that Wil Wheaton made during his time as guest player, and what is the statistical unlikeliness of those rolls? Please also account for times when he rolled a 19 when desiring to roll low.
Given that Wil rolled a d20 54 times over the course of both appearances in the Trial of the Take, we would expect for the frequency of each roll to look similar to this chart, with minor variations (5% of the time):
Instead, the results actually look like this (data from these posts on Episode 20 and Episode 21):
Now, we do have the problem of having a very small sample size of 54 rolls for computing “statistical unlikeliness” (minimum acceptable would be about 1000 rolls). The difference between once and ten times rolled is HUGE when almost all rolls are in the single digits. If we were to boost the trials to 540 rolls, even with Wil’s luck, it’s unlikely he’d have 100 Nat1s and 10 Nat20s. This is the assumption we make with the data we have, in which a single roll can make a world of difference.
But, let’s just assume that this is a perfect representation of how Wil always rolls. Natural 1s made up 18.518% of Wil’s rolls, with a deviation of 73.37% from the expected number of times rolled. It should be noted that rolling any number only once (which is very reasonable for any number to be rolled with 54 total) has a 62.963% deviation. We also calculated the standard deviation, comparing scarily perfect dice to Wheaton’s dice. Again, not very relevant based on such a small sample size, but, hey, if you’re into it, knock yourself out.
Creator / Wil Wheaton
"I thought it was brilliant satire, not only of Trek, but of fandom in general. The only thing I wish they had done was cast me in it, and have me play a freaky fanboy who keeps screaming at the actor who played 'the kid' about how awful it was that there was a kid on the spaceship. Alas."
—Wil Wheaton's review of Galaxy Quest.Wil Wheaton (born Richard William Wheaton III; July 29, 1972) is a geek, blogger, paper collator, and actor best known for Star Trek: The Next Generation and Table Top on Geek & Sundry's YouTube channel.
Born in Burbank, California, he became a full-time actor at the age of 8, scoring small roles and a large voice-acting credit for the classic The Secret of NIMH. Then in 1986, he was cast as the lead in the Rob Reiner movie based on Stephen King's novella The Body, called Stand by Me. This got him plenty of public exposure, enough for him to land the job that he's most known for:
Imagine that you're playing a character that you know is hated by the fandom that you're a part of. Imagine reading the hate mail it gives you, despite the great feelings you have of the cast, the crew, and the creator himself. Now, imagine you're 15, and thus interpreting all the hate as hate against you (which, unfortunately, some of it was). Now you'll understand Wil Wheaton's demeanor towards fans until his epiphany in the late '90s (as chronicled in his story The Saga of Spongebob Vega$pant$, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Star Trek).
Believe it or not, he hates Wesley, or rather what the writers had him do as Wesley. His reviews of the Star Trek: The Next Generation episodes are sure to mention exactly how annoying Wesley is each time he appeared in the show. (Though he did reprise the character in a brief scene in an episode of Star Trek: Picard.) Unfortunately his review column was discontinued in early 2008 when TV Squad was bought by AOL, but he has collected his reviews of the first 13 episodes, expanded them and put them in a book called Memories of the Future: Volume 1 released in late 2009. Memories of the Future Volume 2, due to be released whenever, will cover the rest of the first season, most of which he didn't get the chance to review before the aforementioned discontinuing.
Since embracing his inner geek, he's written four compilations of memoirs, has a famous blog, and is embraced by geekdom as their avatar. It doesn't hurt that many of the mostly guest acting gigs he's scored these days are as geeks or voices of comic book heroes such as Aqualad and the second Blue Beetle. He was a caustic comic book collector on an episode of NUMB3RS that took place at a comic convention, a supremely creepy unsub (as if there's any other kind) on Criminal Minds and a Jerkass computer hacker on Leverage, a role which he has reprised several times.
He also did a hilarious take on Kent Brockman News as Richard Burns on GTA Radio, plays Fawkes on The Guild and was a frequent guest on the Dungeons & Dragons podcast alongside his fellow geek luminaries from Penny Arcade and Pv P. He also plays Darkstar (imagine if Wesley was more obnoxious and villainous) in Ben 10: Alien Force, Ultimate Alien, and Omniverse. He also had a recurring role as Dr. Isaac Parrish, a Jerkass Ace, astronaut candidate, and Fargo's long time rival, on Eureka. He is also the host of TableTop and its RPG spin-off TitansGrave: The Ashes of Valkana, and plays a gleefully evil version of himself as a recurring character in The Big Bang Theory. In addition, Wil, like his The Guild co-star Felicia Day, has a voice role in Fallout: New Vegas, as the voice of the Robobrain enemy. In Code Name: S.T.E.A.M, he voice-acts Abraham Lincoln. He used to host The Wil Wheaton Project, a show which could be described as The Soup for sci-fi/fantasy and geek culture in general, but it was cancelled after a single season. In 2014, he was cast as recurring character Earl Harlan in Welcome to Night Vale.
Offscreen (well, and on, really), he's become pretty much the poster boy for One of Us.
At PAX 2007, he coined what has become known as Wheaton's Law: "Don't Be a Dick." The irony of this, considering most of his TV roles are Jerkass characters, has not been lost on the fandom. This has led to the corollary of Wheaton's Law, "Don't be a dick, but you can play one on TV."
In 2018 he quit posting on Twitter , deleted his archive and made his account private after Elon Musk took over in 2022, and as of May 2023 the account no longer exists. He still posts regularly on Tumblr (incidentally, Jeph Jacques drew his profile image).
By asking specific and concise questions, we can receive guidance that is tailored to our individual circumstances. The witch tarot serves as a tool of insight, allowing us to tap into the wisdom of the universe and our own intuition. It can provide clarity in times of confusion, guidance in moments of decision-making, and a deeper understanding of our own spiritual journey. However, it is crucial to remember that the cards are simply a means of accessing our own inner knowing and should not be relied upon as absolute fate or fortune-telling. In conclusion, inquiring of the witch tarot is an opportunity to delve into the esoteric world of witchcraft and divination. Through its captivating imagery and rich symbolism, this deck offers a unique perspective on our lives and the forces that shape them. By approaching the witch tarot with an open mind and a clear intention, we can gain valuable insights and guidance along our spiritual path..
Reviews for "The Witch Tarot and Divination Tools: Enhancing Your Readings with Pendulums and Crystals"
1. Emma - 2 stars - I was really excited to try out the "Inquire of the witch tarot", but I must say I was disappointed. The artwork on the cards is beautiful, I'll give them that, but the interpretations and explanations provided in the guidebook were quite vague and hard to understand. I couldn't connect with the messages I was getting from the cards and found it difficult to use them effectively for guidance. Overall, I feel like this deck lacked the depth and clarity I was seeking.
2. John - 1 star - I have to say, the "Inquire of the witch tarot" was a complete waste of my money. The artwork is nice, but that's about the only positive aspect. The guidebook is poorly organized and hard to follow. The interpretations often seemed contradictory and didn't make much sense. Additionally, the deck itself feels flimsy and cheaply made. I've used many tarot decks before, and this one falls short in terms of quality and accuracy. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone serious about tarot reading.
3. Sarah - 2 stars - I had high hopes for the "Inquire of the witch tarot", but unfortunately, it didn't live up to my expectations. The cards look gorgeous, no doubt about that, but the interpretations provided in the guidebook felt overly simplified and lacked depth. It felt like the meanings of the cards were watered down, making it difficult for me to get meaningful insights during my readings. I would've appreciated a more nuanced and detailed approach to the tarot. Ultimately, I found this deck to be more of a novelty item rather than a useful tool for self-reflection and guidance.
4. Michael - 2 stars - The "Inquire of the witch tarot" seems to be all style and no substance. The artwork is stunning, but the meaning and interpretation of the cards weren't clear to me. The guidebook didn't offer much guidance, and the explanations felt vague and open to interpretation. I struggled to connect with the symbolism and symbolism is an important aspect of tarot reading for me. While this deck might be visually appealing, it falls short in terms of delivering accurate and meaningful guidance.