JimBee

Jim Butcher - The Chosen One Health: 6 Force Abilities: - Force Push - Saber Throw Mastery Abilities: - Combat Master - Endurance Bio: Jim Butcher came to Coruscant after he led the underground resistance movement against the Trade Federation during the blockade and battle of Naboo. There, he was sensed by Ki-Adi Mundi, who recruited him to the Jedi order and trained him to use a lightsaber as well as control the Force through his mind. Once a Naboose palace guard, he now resides in the Jedi Temple on Coruscant. He's not considered a typical Jedi- he rarely reports to the Jedi Council, instead, he follows orders from the Republic Secret Service. From there, he is given espionage and undercover missions, on which he uses his Force powers to his advantage. He also occasionally practices his skills with the lightsaber and Force with fellow Jedi, or dukes it out with evil Sith. He will also use his customized nailgun in shootouts. Games Won: 17 Games Lost: 3 [image Credit to pedro].

Okay, I'd like to help Sylvia go over the rocks one more time, with hands and eyes. Particularly near the doorway and the right side of the doorway.

SLV... Similar to your name, no? SyLVia. Yia. Well, now that we now what the "silver" is, maybe it means to cut, slash, etc. with the sword.

I'm interested! A few questions, though: - Can I use my Star Wars Comic Game character (ie, a character I've already created)? - How and when do we level up? - Force Adept, do you mean the user is limited to using two per round, but can switch which two they use between rounds? For example: The user already has Force Push and Saber Throw, and chooses to add Force Shield with the Force Adept. In Round 1, user uses Force Push and Saber Throw. In Round 2, can user switch to using Force Push and Force Shield? And when Force Adept is used, that means the user has all three possible Force Abilities? - Is Force Shield the EXACT same as Force Choke? Under Choke it says it can be countered, while Shield doesn't say it. You did say "mirror" abilities counter each other. - Do the challengers have to be online at the same time? So the rounds go quickly? Or does it happen whenever the players happen to be on? The game sounds simple and fun. Thanks for hosting, pedro!

Eh, sorry, I meant Samantha. I don't even see you in the picture?

Ah whooyah! Finally we're off of that dreaded machine. I prefer my feet on solid ground, where my wits are at their best, yes suh. Speaking of which, what were you doing in that picture, Sylvia? It looks like you're knocking on a rock or waving... or somethun'.

I suspect he'll be back... someday. Great movies, I agree. I didn't like the third one very much at all, except for the final fight. But the other two are my all-time favorites, both spectacular. I've watched them hundreds of times each.

Lock your doors. Didn't you get he Santa one from the Reviewers' Academy? I remember somewhere in the secret thread you said something. It's from KimT for sure. Oh yeah, and it looks like someone changed "ostracizes" in my title to the right/ American way.

But you didn't explain?!?!?!?!?!??!?! Please explain before voting for someone. Sound familiar? Due to everything that's been presented here and now, I Vote: Wilkerson/ Ricecracker Yet again. You complain when people vote for you, yet you have no problem doing so "without a reason". You've acted suspicious, been hypocritical, and are now voting someone who obviously isn't a mobster. Notice something- no one is defending Mr. Right, besides myself. If she really was a mobster, don't you think her teammates would've jumped in and kicked your megablocks by now? Not to mention that she's been making herself oh-so obvious for the sake of getting this information that you seek.

Really now? As I said yesterday, would a scum be this obvious? Would a scum be pointing fingers left and right? No. Idiots. Right now it is obvious that some of you ran to Ryan's aid and supported the vote for Sandy, but when you consider what I just said, it doesn't make much sense, does it? Unless some of you are scum. For now, I'll hold my vote until I get the full story via several people. There is method to this madness. Exactly. Yet people are STILL whining about not getting any "concrete" evidence. Mr. Right here should be the one ticked that many of you are so blind to ignore all of the information he's provided for us with his pointing fingers. If I could slap some of you, I really would.

Great job, Brickster. My favorite part would have to be the cantina, although all of the little details you put in are great. I like the idea of taking a video of the whole thing as well, it not only shows all of the details that might be overlooked in the pictures, but shows how well you take care of your bricks and has some great music as well. I take it you're taking a break on your desert layout?

I like it. Lovely work with the upper torso/ shoulder blades and the transfer into the skinny lower torso. Very droid-like, along with the single eye and head piece. Good choice of colors, too. The only thing that I think could be changed is the use of wheels instead of feet. Some clawed feet might be interesting.

And do you care to explain what's in that trash can? Never, EVER assume that. The second you do, the scum have already won. I understand you're new to the business, but learn this lesson good and early. Or weapons... Water! Yes, I carry a wine glass filled with water everywhere I go. And a trash can as well. Why would anyone suspect me, of all people, a bum, drinking when it is illegal? I wonder how I ended up on the streets? Forgive me for being blunt, but Ryan, you cannot be above the law. If it's the best course of action to vote you off today, then at the very least we'll be rid of a law-breaker.

Nononono. You're not Schmelt. I would know it. Anyway, I like the change. I always overlooked Train Tech when I did sweeps through the forum, but now I'll hopefully visit more often.

Nooooooooooooooooooo! This is terrible! Terrible! What do we do now? We have to convict someone today. We'll never win without night actions.

They tried to look alike, but you can see their tags, group, and profile are different. You'll have to do better on April 1st.

OMGZ! So much violence! On topic now. For Christmas, I got the complete James Bond collection. At least that's what the box said, but "Never Say Never Again" and "Quantum of Solace" were not included, the former, because it was produced by a studio other than Columbia Pictures and therefore was not licensed to be in the set, and the latter because it wasn't out at the time of the set's release. Now I can watch all the Bond movies, and catch up on the one's I haven't seen yet. Dr. No: Way better than From Russia With Love. The plot was typical, but I'm sure it made an impact in the 60's. My favorite from Connery so far. Goldfinger: The action was really good, and the plot was something different. Not as good as I expected, though, and I didn't like how stupid they made Felix Leiter look. Starting the trend for "gold"... Goldfinger, The Man With the Golden Gun, Goldeneye... Tomorrow Never Dies: I'll say over and over again: Pierce Brosnan is the best Bond ever. Not only was his acting superior, but the plot was unique with the fact that instead of an insane ex-military leader wanting to rule or destroy the world, the main villain was a mastermind newspaper editor, who caused mayhem and wars just for good ratings. I really liked this one.

Interesting you brought that up, Sarah. I noticed that he had a cup... but never thought about Prohibition. Good catch. I was just about to mention that! Ryan Alberts= Mr. Underwood? Nope, only one of you is in the picture. That person next to Sarah is Rob, the cinema owner. Oh, and look there I am, right behind Mr. Butcher! Oh yes, and my lovely husband and son too...

For megabluck's sake. Nobody is pointing fingers without an explanation, they are obviously doing it because they agree with the accuser. I still am suspicious of both Mr. Wilkerson and Robert, but there's no point in me voting for them if I'm the only one, is there? Multiple people being voted for isn't going to get us anywhere, so we have to decide who to vote for, and quickly. I propose we vote for Mr. Wilkerson again. He's definitely the most suspicious out of all that have been accused before, and we could've been in bed early today. I refuse to believe that he's the vigilante. Call it metagaming, but this was the story in MCII with Richard/ ricecracker. He was in a tight spot, so he made up a lie about him being the town investigator. He's doing the same thing now. Vote: Wilkerson/ Ricecracker

And there's nothing wrong with that, I just thought it might be helpful to single some people out to get them talking. For the last TIME: No substantial evidence is going to fall into your lap. Know why? Because there is none! Clues and suspicions are all we have, and that's what we've got to work with. So stop whining and contribute to the game, or like a certain Florentzia said once, save us the trouble by killing yourself. Might as well be better off dead than no help at all. Fair enough, but I don't remember you accusing Wilkerson. Ah, never mind, it's not important. What the... did I say that? I didn't mean to. Don't do it again, or you'll have no radio, or whatever it is you kids do these days, for one hour. Have a cookie. Shut the hell up, man! You're confusing me! Stop! I know what you said, it's just that that theory is... a little out there. Hell, as long as we have nothing better to do: Unvote: Wilkerson/ Ricecracker Vote: ... on second thought... I'll hold my vote for a few minutes, see what Roy has to say. You have, but I don't feel that you've contributed much. Crazy mayors scare me, especially the kind that dislike green locomotives. ... and poison you ear.

My vote stands for now, although time is wasting. To get a better understanding of who's being suspicious, let's take a look at the quiet ones. Ryan Alberts/ Quarryman: He's been active, but he's simply following the bandwagon every time a vote is cast. Not that it's a problem, but he's hardly said anything at all besides his votes. What does this mean? Jimmy Plamer/ Simonjedi, Mayor White/ Zapper Brick, Alfred Winder/ JCC: All dead silent. Where are they? Are they trying to fly under the radar, or just lack interest? Louis Ingleston/ Dannylonglegs: Same as Ryan. Not following bandwagons much, but not really saying much of importance. Mostly "hmm, I'll have to think about that one" or "Yeah, you're probably right". Rhonda Falzone/ Dragonator: I still believe she has something to hide. She's quiet, and pops in just often enough to defend someone, particularly today, when she defended Rob/ WF and Wilkerson/Ricecracker. Consider those names, and think about their relationships with other people. Now, onto Mr. Right. Do you really think he's scum? Would a mobster really be so stupid to openly accuse so many people? Today, and yesterday, he was the first to vote. And he changed twice today already. Would scum do that? Would he draw so much attention to himself? Scum will usually let the townies fight amongst each other, and pop in to fuel the fire, which is eaxactly the opposite of what Mr. Right is doing, and exactly what others are doing. Think about that.

Do you have a better argument, mister? I did say why I voted for you- I'm going on what Mr. Right is saying, and I believe that it is true. If you've got a problem with it, do something.

Happy New Year! Here's to another prospering year for EB. Can I have a special New Year's jack-in-the-box too?

Unvote: Robert Wills (psst, it's Wills, not Willis) Mr. Right knows what he's doing, and that's all we can go on now. "Concrete" evidence rarely comes by in these games... of life at all, nobody's going to just shout out their role. So suspicions and observations of patterns and such are all we have to go on. I hope some of you realize this before it's too late. Yes, jumping on the bandwagon and convicting someone "just to get something done" is not always the best option, but like Mr. Right said, no one else is providing clues or evidence pointing towards someone else. You ask for concrete evidence? Then return the favor by explaining why you refuse to help, yet you have no evidence on someone else. Vote: Wilkerson/ Ricecracker Addit: Whoops, sorry, it is Willis. In another mystery... of life, there is someone named Wills. Addit: Whoops, sorry, it is Willis. In another mystery... of life, there is someone named Wills.

And would you or Robert care to share his role and/or any reasons why we should not convict him? If you really think we're making a mistake, then please, explain more. Is he really the neutral killer?