@tpr I wasn't worried about Bb5 because I had plenty of counter play if white decided to make that move. I likely would have played c3 to block and then tried to pressure later on in the game . I could have also played the NC3 to block or even the bishop and offered an exchange (which would have favored me if taken; I would have been able to position the queen out and then the knight and castle. I should also note that right now I am incredibly uncomfortable playing with Bishops and almost always favor bishop trades that allow me to develop more with my knights or position my knights in favorable squares).
I'm not all that familiar with this opening, and if I'm being honest, I played the way I did because usually as black I try to create a slow, positional game. Until recently, my opening ideas for black almost always included some sort of Indian game (and I generally play well in Indian games). Had white's opening move been e4 I likely would have played the Scandinavian Defense because it's something I've been trying more and more (and with fairly mixed results for me. I'm still learning most of this stuff obviously :)
Here, I think I just wanted to try something different. For example, the Bishop trades was something that I just did because I wanted to see what white's response was going to be (and that was likely a really bad idea because a ton of things could have gone wrong; and if he would have taken with the Knight, he would have started development and had the edge); I actually figured he'd take the bishop on d2 with the knight, but once he played the Queen, I felt like I had an opening for an attack because I was positive he was going to take the other bishop with the Queen instead of the Knight giving me the idea (11. Ne4 and then the pawn coming into play which I didn't think would be the response, so the retreat on 12. But the pawn again moved me back to that initial idea and then I played the queen to complete the idea. Here, I should probably consider what would have happened if he didn't push the pawn) and figured that positional advantage with the knights would, in worst case, at least give me an edge, even if his response would have been 12. Ne2 (I still would have had development with an additional knight and the castle. I would have looked for a way to get my Queen and Rook into play and continued trying to push the knights).
Or I could have done something completely different. Again, looking at the game, I wonder if maybe I should have played the Kings pawn opening or Nf6 to start the game and seen where it went from there. Had I played Nf6 I would have likely tried to get into a variation of an Indian game, which again wasn't what I wanted to do in this game.
@intro_bard_bot The timid play most of the time is due to lack of familiarity and learning. I haven't figured out how to play aggressively as black, and like I've said above, I usually end up trying to play some variation of an Indian game. The advice above is golden, and I'm certainly looking for ways to improve consistently throughout the game. I've started reading Karpov's "Find the Right Plan" and could use suggestions for a reading list, if you have anything you think would be useful to look at and would be something a relatively advanced novice could understand. Mostly, I'm learning new things right now, and hoping to find more consistent play down the line. I think that the last week or so has been good for me (also corresponds to when I started with the Karpov book; the big idea I've kinda taken to heart is to play with a plan rather than respond to whatever my opponent plays using the seven basic principals outlined in the introduction to the text . I've also taken more notice with pawn structure and how to use that to an advantage earlier in games. This game isn't really a good example of what I've been learning from that book save for the idea that eventually led to the resignation).