Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Maul as of Rebels, Ti in her prime. Battle takes place on Lothal. Who wins?

Bonus round: Ti gets two elite magnas as backup, Maul gets Savage Opress.

Maul loses alone but with Savage he takes her

Ti makes ILS cry.

Isn't Maul supposed to be better than in TCW? In either case, he was near enough matching Ahsoka, who goes on to contend with a Vader that'd shame Shaak. Horny red wins.

Originally posted by SunRazer
Isn't Maul supposed to be better than in TCW? In either case, he was near enough matching Ahsoka, who goes on to contend with a Vader that'd shame Shaak. Horny red wins.
Ti could replicate Ahsoka's showing against Vader tbh. It wasn't too impressive

Very unsmart opinions coming from Ching right now.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Very unsmart opinions coming from Ching right now.
Well it's not like she was matching Vader. Ti and Ahsoka are very close together IMO

Shaak blitzed five MagnaGuards; three were enough to beat RotS Obi, who is > ANH Obi, who is > Rebels Obi, who is >>>> Maul.

So, Shaak >> Rots Obi > Rebels Obi >>>> Maul.

Yeah Maul still wins...

And the notion of Shaak actually matching Vader similarly to Ahsoka is rather absurd.

Originally posted by MythLord
Shaak blitzed five MagnaGuards; three were enough to beat RotS Obi, who is > ANH Obi, who is > Rebels Obi, who is >>>> Maul.

So, Shaak >> Rots Obi > Rebels Obi >>>> Maul.

I am going to assume your not serious.

What about my not serious?

Ok I gotta ask cause it's bugging me, but what exactly has Vader done up to the Rebels time period saber wise, that makes matching him great? Far as I know, the only lightsaber combat he has done was tooling Kanan and Ezra in a non serious manner.

But...I don't really see that as much a lightsaber feat considered he outclassed them anyway.

Maul slaughter house

Shaak Ti.

Originally posted by Zenwolf
Ok I gotta ask cause it's bugging me, but what exactly has Vader done up to the Rebels time period saber wise, that makes matching him great? Far as I know, the only lightsaber combat he has done was tooling Kanan and Ezra in a non serious manner.

But...I don't really see that as much a lightsaber feat considered he outclassed them anyway. Rebels is his prime, so all his feats apply.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Rebels is his prime, so all his feats apply.

That's it?...You'll forgive if I can't really believe he didn't get better saber wise over the years given how long it's been from Rebels to ROTJ.

It's less than three years before ANH, not a big leap for someone whose had decades to develop his power and skill, ESB and RotJ are set only a few years after that, but by the latter (and maybe even before that) he's not at his best.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Rebels is his prime, so all his feats apply.

Anything other than non canon author statements to back that up?

Even so, what feats. All Canon Vader has that's great in duelling is beating Luke, whose only strong feat is being a match for Vader mmm

Hell, Vader's best feat might actually just be matching Kenobi, and even that could be put down to Kenobi being a Soresu duellist

Originally posted by SunRazer
Isn't Maul supposed to be better than in TCW? In either case, he was near enough matching Ahsoka, who goes on to contend with a Vader that'd shame Shaak. Horny red wins.

No, unless you believe quotes which have literally no canon authority. Doesn't take much to notice Maul atrophied.

What's your proof that he'd shame Shaak? I don't buy it. TFU Vader has superior feats to his Canon self at this point in time, and Galen did significantly better than Ahsoka, because, you know, he actually won. Even if you think Marek improved, there's not much to suggest his blade skill increased significantly after fighting Shaak (who was considered strong enough to be his final test). I'll accept that his ability to actually control his force powers did, however.

So if she can effectively out-duel a duelist who mildly improved, then butchered a stronger Vader than the Canon one..... why would Canon Vader shame her? mmm

Seems like pretty trash tier logic Nova, though that seems par for the course recently.

Pablo Hidalgo, a member of the Lucasfilm Story Group... is a non-canon author? Who knew.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
It's less than three years before ANH, not a big leap for someone whose had decades to develop his power and skill, ESB and RotJ are set only a few years after that, but by the latter (and maybe even before that) he's not at his best.

Well Force Users aren't exactly bound by human limitations, they can learn/improve much faster.

But if this is really what Canon is going for....then...yikes.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Pablo Hidalgo, a member of the Lucasfilm Story Group... is a non-canon author? Who knew.

Yes, he's an author.

I guess if you want to take his opinions as gospel we might as well start using the Head-to-Head series. Lord knows all of those were infallible perfectly valid opinions, right?

And yes, author statements are still non canon sweetie, sorry.

Originally posted by Zenwolf
Well Force Users aren't exactly bound by human limitations, they can learn/improve much faster.

But if this is really what Canon is going for....then...yikes. I didn't say anything about human limitations. There are many examples of Force users failing to improve in any notable way over even longer periods.

Originally posted by Selenial
Yes, he's an author.

I guess if you want to take his opinions as gospel we might as well start using the Head-to-Head series. Lord knows all of those were infallible perfectly valid opinions, right?

And yes, author statements are still non canon sweetie, sorry. He's a member of the Story Group lel, he authors Canon.

And Head-to-Head is a series of what if scenarios, i.e. non-continuity, nor necessarily representative of his personal views. But good to know your prepared to dismiss published source material as invalid when it doesn't suit your opinions.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
I didn't say anything about human limitations. There are many examples of Force users failing to improve in any notable way over even longer periods.

I doubt Vader would be one of them.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
He's a member of the Story Group lel, he authors Canon.

And Head-to-Head is a series of what if scenarios, i.e. non-continuity, nor necessarily representative of his personal views. But good to know your prepared to dismiss published source material as invalid when it doesn't suit your opinions.

And his statements are still not Canon. Not sure what part of that you're not quite understanding

He's also the ****ing "Brand Communications Manager", what a top level position when it comes to determining Canon. Does their IT guy count as a canon source now? I hear he's a Talzin fan

Originally posted by Zenwolf
I doubt Vader would be one of them. Why when Dooku, Windu, Yoda & the like are?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
I didn't say anything about human limitations. There are many examples of Force users failing to improve in any notable way over even longer periods.

Name a single top tier Sith that atrophied in skill and force power while:
- Actively training and meditating
- Being in their combative prime, for a Force User
- Being a Rule of Two Sith Lord.

Pretty sure there isn't a single Sith who fits that list, outside of extenuating circumstances like temporary amps.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Why when Dooku, Windu, Yoda & the like are?

There's a difference between no noticeable improvements (which is quite frankly debatable at best with those characters) and decreasing in skill. A prime implies areas before and after in which said character is not as strong as he is during his prime.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Why when Dooku, Windu, Yoda & the like are?

Because it's not like Vader is lacking in his body's physicals or anything. What exactly is stopping him from improving on his technique? I mean fine, if Canon wants him to be this way....then ok I guess.

It's just, a whole of 3 fights doesn't really tell me much imo, when 2 of them are years after Rebels, post-ANH when he could have improved.

Originally posted by Selenial
And his statements are still not Canon. Not sure what part of that you're not quite understanding Not sure what part of this:

http://i.imgur.com/bUCaZqc.png

You're not getting either. mmm

That gives him the authority to well, determine Canon, which he does as a segment in every Rebels Recon.

Wow, did you really think this was relevant when you posted it? You're going senile.

Originally posted by Selenial
There's a difference between no noticeable improvements (which is quite frankly debatable at best with those characters) and decreasing in skill. A prime implies areas before and after in which said character is not as strong as he is during his prime. Implies perhaps, but its not really necessary. Moreover the period of Vader's prime could conceivably be Rebels (or around then) onward.

Originally posted by Zenwolf
Because it's not like Vader is lacking in his body's physicals or anything. What exactly is stopping him from improving on his technique? I mean fine, if Canon wants him to be this way....then ok I guess.

It's just, a whole of 3 fights doesn't really tell me much imo, when 2 of them are years after Rebels, post-ANH when he could have improved. Not practicing much, not fighting many people? Being at the top of his game and having to make some serious innovations to get notably better? I think there is a point at which one becomes as good as one is going to get, unless your able to trigger some radical evolution in mentality, ability or otherwise put in a whole butt load of effort tbh. That's what it means to have your skills plateau.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Not practicing much, not fighting many people? Being at the top of his game and having to make some serious innovations to get notably better? I think there is a point at which one becomes as good as one is going to get, unless your able to trigger some radical evolution in mentality, ability or otherwise put in a whole butt load of effort tbh. That's what it means to have your skills plateau.


Why wouldn't he practice?

But frankly I kinda need more than just a word that Rebels is his prime.

He might, but he's quite busy. So it's not like he can do it a ton.

Too bad, suck it up pally.

Originally posted by Selenial
I guess if you want to take his opinions as gospel we might as well start using the Head-to-Head series. Lord knows all of those were infallible perfectly valid opinions, right? Pretty sure Hidalgo doesn't even decide the head-to-head victors:

https://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/18/86/74/45/img_4510.png

Originally posted by SunRazer
Isn't Maul supposed to be better than in TCW? In either case, he was near enough matching Ahsoka, who goes on to contend with a Vader that'd shame Shaak. Horny red wins.

Yea, he was said to have grown as a swordsman since the Clone Wars.

On topic, Maul wins.

Nice find, Joker.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Not sure what part of this:

You're not getting either. mmm

That gives him the authority to well, determine Canon, which he does as a segment in every Rebels Recon.

Wow, did you really think this was relevant when you posted it? You're going senile.

The story group decides what is and is not canon. They (notice the plural here) go through published and soon to be published material and determine what is canon and what needs to be removed. Even as a body, they do not themselves create canon material.

Ergo, a statement from a member of the story group is not canon, unless their statement is backed up by a canon source. They determine what sources are and are not canon, they themselves are not a canon source. They also must work as a group, not as a singular individual, so taking a single member of the Story Group's comment as canon is not viable at all.

And yes, his rank is relevant, I'd lend more weight to Chee than to Hidalgo, as Chee is quite clearly the ranking member of the story group.

At the end of the day, all Hidalgo's comment can be taken to mean by those who take his word as gospel, is that as it stands in current canon material, Rebels is Vader's prime. Should a new novel be released however that comes after Rebels and features Vader, said position would have to have been re-evaluated by the Story Group, and his previous statements should be rendered beyond irrelevant.

This differs entirely from a Canon quote, which would exist in the mythos until explicitly retconned.

As a side note, Hidalgo's quote shouldn't be taken (even by you) to apply to Composite Vader, as numerous individuals have tried to do over the past few weeks. Canon takes precedence, sure, but Hidalgo's quote is not literally Canon, and several quotes exist in Legends claiming Vader constantly improved.

Just a reminder, you've still yet to explain what Rebels being Vader's prime actually does for him in Current Canon.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Pretty sure Hidalgo doesn't even decide the head-to-head victors:

Well, thanks for the help in rendering his opinion beyond worthless, then.

He has substantial amounts of time to peruse a source before approving it, and still cannot justify or stand behind one of the conclusions made in it? That means he either has no authority to change things in the Story Group, or that he deems his own opinion less than that of "experts", or that he put so little effort into the published material that he didn't spot it.

None of which bode well for taking his word as gospel

Nm

Originally posted by Selenial
The story group decides what is and is not canon. They (notice the plural here) go through published and soon to be published material and determine what is canon and what needs to be removed. Even as a body, they do not themselves create canon material.

Ergo, a statement from a member of the story group is not canon, unless their statement is backed up by a canon source. They determine what sources are and are not canon, they themselves are not a canon source. They also must work as a group, not as a singular individual, so taking a single member of the Story Group's comment as canon is not viable at all.Your conclusion doesn't follow on from your point, no new content has been created here. Pablo has merely clarified on when Vader's prime is, which, as a member of Story Group that determines Canon and it's direction, he has the authority to do. This is very simple and easy to grasp. That said your assessment is incorrect, the Story Group do indeed have the capacity to develop new continuity, entirely on their own, and have done already for TFA, and elsewhere. So this is well within Pablo's capacity to do.

And given that like I said, Pablo has a segment in Rebels Recon in which he answers questions regarding continuity, in an official capacity, he's evidently in a position to act as a spokesperson.

Conjecture, lol. There is no reason to believe Pablo lacks authority where Chee has it, and you have no idea where he ranks within the story group. Or if there is even an internal ranking at all.

EDIT: I tell a lie, as of SWC 2016 he's been titled as a "Creative Executive", so I suppose that gives him executive authority over creative content.

Erm no? The story group do not react to developments in continuity, they determine them. How have you not grasped this? In which respect they have determined that as of Rebels, Vader is in his prime, ergo, all future continuity will follow in that vein, unless they decide otherwise.

Another redundant paragraph. I know how canon works thanks.

On the other hand yes, Vader being in his prime in Rebels is Canon with a capital C.

Originally posted by Selenial
Well, thanks for the help in rendering his opinion beyond worthless, then.

He has substantial amounts of time to peruse a source before approving it, and still cannot justify or stand behind one of the conclusions made in it? That means he either has no authority to change things in the Story Group, or that he deems his own opinion less than that of "experts", or that he put so little effort into the published material that he didn't spot it.

None of which bode well for taking his word as gospel Really out doing yourself here with the nonsense conjecture.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Your conclusion doesn't follow on from your point, no new content has been created here. Pablo has merely clarified on when Vader's prime is, which, as a member of Story Group that determines Canon and it's direction, he has the authority to do. This is very simple and easy to grasp. That said your assessment is incorrect, the Story Group do indeed have the capacity to develop new continuity, entirely on their own, and have done already for TFA, and elsewhere. So this is well within Pablo's capacity to do.

Source that the Story Group themselves wrote the creation of the Republic, Leia's issues with the Senate etc?



I'm fully aware of Rebels Recon, that's where this quote originates. All they talk of in that show is their intention behind a variety of events in the show. Speaking in an official capacity on a panel does not make something Canon.

Or do you fully accept that in the Legends continuity Vitiate is the most powerful Sith Lord? Bioware writers have said as much during live-streamed panels, their words are Out of Universe and not based on time zones. They dictate what is and is not legends canon for the SWTOR universe, it's effectively the same thing, you just disagree so are surely about to perform some staggering mental gymnastics to make them look different



No, they react to them, or they'd be the only authors of anything in Star Wars. When Karpyshyn wrote Dromund Kaas, he wrote it how he wished to write it. Leland Chee would then go over what he had written and affirm whether or not that fit with the continuity, and would make cuts accordingly. There's no evidence the new system works any differently. Authors have access to what is and is not canon, they are not then told what to make canon, they are the writers, the Story Group are the proofreaders.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Really out doing yourself here with the nonsense conjecture.

If you have another explanation, please share

So far, you're really "out doing yourself here" with your usual complete avoidance of the appropriate area of discussion. I asked you in the original post what Rebels being Vader's prime actually did for him, you ignored it, I asked you again and you, yet again, ignored it.

It seems you had genuinely no argument to begin with, and are only nitpicking a singular sentence because even you are aware of how weak your argument is

Originally posted by Selenial
Source that the Story Group themselves wrote the creation of the Republic, Leia's issues with the Senate etc?I never said they wrote the plot you numpty, but yes, they were involved, like in defining how Starkiller Base worked.

Obviously you're not otherwise you'd know that at the end of Rebels Recon, Pablo answers general questions concerning continuity, not necessarily about the episode or even specifically about the show. Much like Leland Chee has in the past before the reboot. And yes, that stuff is Canon. Try also to understand that Pablo Hidalgo is not Dave Filoni, he is not a member of the Rebels creative team, he is there to represent the Story Group.

Are any of the BioWare writers members of the Lucasfilm Story Group, or any kind of equivalent? Good Lord, why do you ask these stupid questions?

facepalm

No that is not how it works, the writers come to them, with story propositions, and the Story Group guides the process, that is how it works now. That is the whole point of the Story Group you utter imbecile. Even the director of Rogue One had to report to them.

Why? Unlike you I prefer to avoid spewing conjecture and instead deal with the facts presented which are:

1. Pablo Hidalgo is a member of the Lucasfilm Story Group, and in fact a Creative Executive, which have the authority to determine Canon.

2. The Head-to-Head series represent what if scenarios and therefore are not part of continuity.

3. The outcomes of the Head-to-Head series do not represent Pablo's views.

My god. Where do you get off? I did not reply since it was unrelated to proving my point which is that Vader is Rebel's prime. As you might have noticed, I haven't actually made an argument yet, let alone predicated it on this statement. I may address your points later, if time allows, provided you've accepted the validity of the statement first.

Your tears taste saltier than usual my darling, though perhaps that's due to the fact this debate loosely involves Ahsoka. I'll excuse your rampant attempts to hide your flawed arguments through abusive language because of this, I'm fully aware that when it comes to Ahsoka you're less than stable

Originally posted by Beniboybling
I never said they wrote the plot you numpty, but yes, they were involved, like in defining how Starkiller Base worked.

Actually, you did:
"he Story Group do indeed have the capacity to develop new continuity, entirely on their own, and have done already for TFA"

Defining how Starkiller base works is different to labelling Darth Vader as in his prime, him being in his prime is a "plot point", as it pertains to his character. Clarifying scientific details of an already established premise is entirely different. In all likelihood, the details of Starkiller Base were fleshed out long before the Story Group commented on it, they are merely the ones who can reference previous continuity and see established Canon that the masses cannot.



"And yes, that stuff is Canon".

Give me a quote, you're legitimately just basing an entirely new argument around an already disputed fact. That doesn't make the thing we're disputing any less factual facepalm



What a phenomenal strawman you have there

The Lucasfilm Story Group was not invented when these writers made these claims. They served the role that the Story Group serves now, and they made their comments in an official capacity. Their claims have no stake in Canon, but by your truly incredible logic, should be taken as perfectly valid in the Legends continuity.



Yes, he had to create content and then report to them for clarification. That is exactly what I said. Stop getting tetchy sweetie, this'll all be over soon


That's some pretty phenomenal irony. Not once has anyone ever said Pablo's views are canon, you are attempting to prove as much based on a wealth of evidence that supposedly points towards him being a Canon source... sounds a lot like conjecture buddy, even if you think it's valid.

Yes he has the authority to determine what's canon, when he is acting as part of the Lucasfilm Story Group. The Head to Head series are still based on canon, if their conclusions were invalid, Pablo should be rewriting them. I could similarly turn around to you, if your thinking was correct, and claim that since Darth Vader's prime is "not part of the continuity" he has no authority to speak on it

Originally posted by Selenial
Anything other than non canon author statements to back that up?

Even so, what feats. All Canon Vader has that's great in duelling is beating Luke, whose only strong feat is being a match for Vader mmm

Hell, Vader's best feat might actually just be matching Kenobi, and even that could be put down to Kenobi being a Soresu duellist

I know this is a response to Beni here, but the fact that "it can be put down to Kenobi being a Soresu duelist" is a point in favour of Vader, not against him.



Apart from some circumstantial low showings, not really. Maul's evidently within range of Vader, as his performance against Ahsoka and Ahsoka's subsequent performance against Vader shows. Even if he did decline it wouldn't be by much.



Unless I'm mistaken, Galen claims to have improved with every mission and grows stronger once he commits himself to the light side over the dark (which of course has historical basis). So that's a considerable growth.



Galen "butchered" a Vader that was fighting recklessly and not to the best of his ability, with the aid of Dun Moch that managed to unsettle Vader completely. By contrast, Vader rather easily outdueled Galen's clone in TFU II, with said clone not only logically but factually possessing the fighting skills of his original host.

Vader's factually the strongest duelist in the galaxy at the time, which makes it clear that he's above Shaak, or Galen, for that matter. As for why I have Canon Vader over TFU Vader, again, unless I'm mistaken, both Canon and Legends are available here, with Canon technically taking precedence. Therefore, Vader's quote of supremacy in Canon as of Rebels applies over any of his quotes in Legends. Or in other words, he's stronger than his prime in Legends; all feats and accolades are available. At least, that's certainly how the OP intends it, and I'll respect that because I'm not particularly interested in a prolonged argument over what's canon or not.



I tend to ignore these sorts of statements when anyone's favoured character is a point of the discussion.

Originally posted by SunRazer
I know this is a response to Beni here, but the fact that "it can be put down to Kenobi being a Soresu duelist" is a point in favour of Vader, not against him.

Debatable, one could argue that if Kenobi was a Juyo practitioner in as good sted, he'd have been victorious. Two good Soresu duelists should theoretically stalemate for a long time.



Power scaling trains like that do not work. Otherwise, Kanan is "evidently within range of Vader". 'Circumstantial' doesn't exist in Star Wars, Maul had clearly regressed, if he had progressed as a fighter he would not have attempted to kill Kenobi with the same move-set he used against Qui-Gon. If he himself thinks his TPM incarnation was his strongest, it's pretty clear that Rebels is not.



Shaak was his last mission though. Yes he grows stronger as a Force User, I agree with that. Shaak isn't a Galen level force user, so obviously he grows after being fairly evenly matched with her. Saber wise however, there's little indication of substantial growth.



That was simply a part of that Vader's fighting style, he was reckless for a long time. Dun Moch also didn't play a huge role in the fight, Vader was clearly outmatched. You'll have to show me the areas in which Vader outdueled Galen's clone 'easily' though. Not to mention TFU II takes place nearly 3 years after the first, during which Vader would evidently have been improving his skills, and during which Vader had ample sparring partners in the Clones of Starkiller. Quite easy to learn to beat someone who you've faced a thousand times, when they've fought you once...



I don't disagree that Vader's above them. And no, 'both Canon and Legends' are not available, because we are discussing the power scaling from a Legends Shaak Ti or from a Canon Maul. Maul's Legends and Canon feats are Valid, yes, same with Shaak Ti's, but you cannot attempt to combine Vader together and scale them both from the same beast. Canon Vader and Legends Vader are not the same. Ti's placement can not in any way come from Canon Vader, because that's not the story she was written in. She's dead in Canon at that point, how do you make a composite Ti out of that?

Composite characters are excuses for people to cherry-pick the best quotes. I can understand composite if the versus thread involves them, sure, but you can't scale other characters off them, that simply doesn't work.

If you did, and you took the Rebels quote above the ROTJ Novel etc, then Galen Marek's standing in the mythos vastly increases, as he would have essentially beaten the strongest Darth Vader. He did not, Legends Vader improved afterwards, so you can't start making grandiose claims about Marek's ability based off another Continuity's ranking of Vader. Canon and Legends should be separated in this regard...



Shaak isn't even in my top 5, take it however you want.

Originally posted by Selenial
Debatable, one could argue that if Kenobi was a Juyo practitioner in as good sted, he'd have been victorious. Two good Soresu duelists should theoretically stalemate for a long time.

Except Vader's factually better per about three quotes, so Obi-Wan wouldn't have been victorious on merit of skill or anything of the sort. And Vader's a Djem So practitioner, not Soresu. Obi-Wan's form being designed to prolong engagements and Vader fighting more cautiously would only serve to extend the fight, not lessen it. So again, a mark for Vader, not against him.



Circumstances dictate the majority of fights in Star Wars. The reality is, as many authors have put to us, that on any given day, any character can beat another. In other words, even established hierarchies can be effectively undermined on the whim of an author. Such is the nature of fiction.

That doesn't mean, however, that we can simply ignore said hierarchies; the nature of the battles forums is that we try to adhere to them as much as possible and ignore PIS. That's what I'm doing here by disregarding Kanan's showing.

And I'm not seeing any indication of Maul thinking that his TPM incarnation is strongest. He attempted the Qui-Gon attack because he recognized Obi-Wan's form as being susceptible to it; with Obi-Wan of course not actually fighting in Qui-Gon's style but simply using that stance to lure Maul into such an attack. That he doesn't make use of that attack in other situations is proof that it's circumstantial as opposed to him generally thinking of TPM Maul as superior to himself.

Filoni's comments come from Rebel Recon. Pretty sure that's canon, but either way, in the absence of compelling evidence of otherwise, we can pretty safely run off that.



Well, one's connection to the Force is part of that; if your connection to the Force grows stronger then so will your skills. And Galen does note his skills increased after Nar Shaddaa. You're right in that nothing explicitly indicates he grew substantially, although historically, those that abandon the dark side to join the light tend to do so.



Where did you get three years from? It's less than a year apart - 1BBY vs 2BBY (Wookieepedia claims that TFU goes up to 1BBY but I'm not sure what source that's from).



Well, that's part of the mess of mixing and matching Canon and Legends that we've fallen into. But I actually agree; keeping them distinct is much simpler, but that also makes them all the more difficult to compare. So does the fact that Canon characters are just so lacking in exploration. So we'd be better off not making such a comparison to begin with.

In the event that we're isolating the two, I'm unfortunately not completely up to date with Canon Vader. Didn't he beat Commander Karbin, someone who was supposed to be a stronger version of Grievous, essentially? Of course, it helps that this Maul is a stronger version than the one that matched Grievous in SoD #1 and SoD #4, and managed to fend off Mace Windu (an 8 bordering on a 9) whilst incapacitating Aayla Secura in SoD #3. To my knowledge, Qui-Gon has nothing in Canon, so Maul's TPM feats can't be accurately judged. But there's always his TCW showings.

Either way, if Rebels Maul is stronger than his previous incarnations, then he's definitely an 8 since his TPM incarnation alone was 8. Whereas Legends Vader is likely a 7; Ben Kenobi almost certainly was given his massive atrophy between RotS and ANH. And Shaak's below that. So Maul still wins.



That's what AP said about Kun, lol.

Originally posted by Selenial
Your tears taste saltier than usual my darling, though perhaps that's due to the fact this debate loosely involves Ahsoka. I'll excuse your rampant attempts to hide your flawed arguments through abusive language because of this, I'm fully aware that when it comes to Ahsoka you're less than stable Please don't mistake honesty for saltiness Sel, you are behaving like an idiot and frankly I see it as my responsibility to tell you.

Please explain what part of that constitutes "they wrote the story." As I said, they developed continuity for TFA i.e. how Starkiller Base works.

No Darth Vader having a prime is what is preexisting, Pablo is merely indeed clarifying when that prime is. The manner in which Starkiller Base works is not an established premise, only that somehow, it functions. The details of which are in fact murky and not fleshed out, which is why the Story Group has been brought in to handle it. Here are some details:

http://uproxx.com/hitfix/291-days-until-star-wars-even-lucasfilm-is-trying-to-figure-out-how-starkiller-base-works/
http://steelewars.com/lucasfilms-pablo-hidalgo-confirms-starkiller-could-move/

Peruse at your leisure.

I provided the quote on the prievous page. It's that big white tweet from Leland Chee.

My point here is that Pablo is acting as a spokeperson in that regard, and indeed in an official capacity. Try to keep up.

No you just completely missed the point. Being that BioWare writers do not have a mandate to dictate canon, be that by being part of the Story Group, or an equivalent. And no, they do not serve the same role as the Story Group, they do not have overreaching control over Legends or any continuity, only creative control over their own product.

Uhuh, what I meant m'dear is that the writers go through them from the beginning, not after creating the content, and in that way, they guide the entire process. Here, let Pablo spell it out for you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvT2F1j-SvA&t=14m53s

i.e. if its been established by the Story Group that Rebels is Vader's prime, that gets added to a framework which all future Vader content it's ensured aligns with. Again, very simple, basic stuff.

Thank God, but can I get a clearer ETA on when you plan to go back into retirement?

Me included, did you have a point here or? On the other hand no, everything I said there is plainly factual.

As he was in Rebels Recon yeah, good to see your starting to get to grips with this.

Not at all, because its the Story Group's job to manage continuity, which the outcomes in Head-to-Head are not.

How the nature of Darth Vader's character exists too outside of continuity is beyond me, please do your best to explain, and I'll do my best not to contract any more strains of cancer.

Originally posted by Selenial
Well, thanks for the help in rendering his opinion beyond worthless, then.

He has substantial amounts of time to peruse a source before approving it, and still cannot justify or stand behind one of the conclusions made in it? That means he either has no authority to change things in the Story Group, or that he deems his own opinion less than that of "experts", or that he put so little effort into the published material that he didn't spot it.

None of which bode well for taking his word as gospel Head-to-Head is a book of hypothetical battles, I doubt the Story Group gives a shit about maintaining the foundation of Canon in such content.

Damn, Sel reverse raping Beni.

Huh? I thought I was supposed to be the salty one darling.

I'm not salty, babe.

I'm being the same dick I've always been.

I remember a time when Beni also didn't take the Hidalgo quote seriously. That was before the Assoka duel tho, interestingly.

Originally posted by cs_zoltan
interestingly.

Not really.


I do agree with Beni, tho.

I remembur when zoltan used to be worth my time, people change.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
I'm not salty, babe.

I'm being the same dick I've always been.

I remember a time when you weren't constantly choking on salt generated by Sel...lel just kidding. It was always like that.

You misspelt cancer.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
You misspelt cancer.

http://naturallyorganic.biz/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/spelt-waar-te-koop.png

The context of the Vader in his Prime quote could have easily been referring to his level of evilness.

And even if it refers to his power level, there's nothing to say he degraded later (aside from the fact he was conflicted whilst fighting Luke in ROTJ.

Pacers win.

Yus

They're showing PG Highlights rn

His OT stats were sick as f-uck.

Since March 5th, PG has averaged 28.1 ppg

Damn it PG

Tip off.

Stop with ur sports fuggotry

Indiana missing everything

What a gai raptors attack.

Pacers an suck

I went for a beer. Who got that loose ball foul?

PG

No one can f-ucking score

Need some PG magic.

Not gettin it rn

Originally posted by cs_zoltan
Need some PG magic.

there it is

Pacers r slaughtering LEZ go

Originally posted by SunRazer




Well, that's part of the mess of mixing and matching Canon and Legends that we've fallen into. But I actually agree; keeping them distinct is much simpler, but that also makes them all the more difficult to compare. So does the fact that Canon characters are just so lacking in exploration. So we'd be better off not making such a comparison to begin with.



Yet they are compared anyway.

Originally posted by Selenial
Anything other than non canon author statements to back that up?

Even so, what feats. All Canon Vader has that's great in duelling is beating Luke, whose only strong feat is being a match for Vader mmm

Hell, Vader's best feat might actually just be matching Kenobi, and even that could be put down to Kenobi being a Soresu duellist



No, unless you believe quotes which have literally no canon authority. Doesn't take much to notice Maul atrophied.

What's your proof that he'd shame Shaak? I don't buy it. TFU Vader has superior feats to his Canon self at this point in time, and Galen did significantly better than Ahsoka, because, you know, he actually won. Even if you think Marek improved, there's not much to suggest his blade skill increased significantly after fighting Shaak (who was considered strong enough to be his final test). I'll accept that his ability to actually control his force powers did, however.

So if she can effectively out-duel a duelist who mildly improved, then butchered a stronger Vader than the Canon one..... why would Canon Vader shame her? mmm

Seems like pretty trash tier logic Nova, though that seems par for the course recently.
Feloni, the head of all animation projects including rebels, one of rebe;s's creators, and one of rebels' producers and a core member of the lucas film story group has no authority? His word coming in a star wars releashed show with the purpose of giving people info directly from members of the lucasfilm story group(who control canon) about star wars rebels doesn't have authority?

power wise canon vader has the malachor showing which vastly outclasses any legend showings for ti

Nah. Shifting the alignment of a planet is much better tbh.

No it's not DD, because Shaak didn't use her power, *burp* she introduced the szechuan sauce to the Felucians DD, and that shifted them towards the light side. Once- *burp* Shaak died, nobody could bring them the sauce DD, so they fell to the dark side. It's all about the Sauce DD, it's been about the sauce from the very beginning. 9 more TFU games where the Starkiller clone searches for Shaak's hidden szechuan sauce DD, gonna be 97 more years of TFU...

I gotta go take a shit.

*Thousands of Ricks scream in terror*

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Pacers were slaughtered by the knicks

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Feloni, the head of all animation projects including rebels, one of rebe;s's creators, and one of rebels' producers and a core member of the lucas film story group has no authority? His word coming in a star wars releashed show with the purpose of giving people info directly from members of the lucasfilm story group(who control canon) about star wars rebels doesn't have authority?



Nah it's his opinion. For it to be Canon fact he'd have to put it to paper in a sourcebook. And even if we take his word as transcript, you're twisting his words, making presumptions that suit your own arguments.

Fact is TCW Maul's showings are superior to Rebels Maul. And that is Canon.

When did Filoni say Rebels Maul > TCW Maul.

Some of these arguments are quite amusing.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
When did Filoni say Rebels Maul > TCW Maul.


Exactly

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Feloni, the head of all animation projects including rebels, one of rebe;s's creators, and one of rebels' producers and a core member of the lucas film story group


And btw, Filoni isn't part of the story group.

Rocky is confused, yeah.

Rebels Maul < TCW Maul, yes, but I really do wonder by how much. I doubt the difference is that significant tbh.

^ Yeah probably not a huge difference.

Tbh I don't think there's a huge difference between any of the major Maul incarnations.

Originally posted by Petrus
Rebels Maul < TCW Maul, yes, but I really do wonder by how much. I doubt the difference is that significant tbh.

Force wise I suppose there's a difference, not too sure about anything else though.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Rocky is confused, yeah.
doesn't really matter. Rebels recon is publishe don sw.com, is released by the official youtube channel star wars prpose and feloni as the head of all animation projects has direct authority over rebels, so yea the quote's still canonical.
A for the quote:
This has been explained here in depth(here's the full video :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eIZsJsck7A). the shortness of the duel was

A. for storytelling purposes it was supposed to be symbolic of their respective growth as characters

B. Because maul and Kenobi and Mul had fought each other multiple times

C. Given the more realistic kind of fighting they styled this after, the shorter fight was chosen partially because the duo improved as duelists and in reali life very good fighters have short fights:

"The actual duel is very short, how did you come to the conclusion it had to come this way?...(feloni) If you talk to a lot of people who sword fight, they'll tell you people who are very good don't have long fights. So that scene, its a homage to the 7th samurai. I think on one level people would be excited to see another prolonged lightsaber fight. But I just never really saw the confrontation that way because to do that is to say the characters don't have growth "
Even if you want to interpret growth to not refer to their skill as duelists(even though the context is clearly about their ability as combatants), duelists" them being "very good" swordsman as a reason for the shorter fight compared to their longer "prolonged" fights in tcw clearly indicates growth. As this is referring to them as of their fight with each other this would factor maul's emotional state(even though logically, it would make him more powerful vs kenobi not less combatively speaking given how darksiders operate) and his physical degradement(which could have been canceled out with force augmentation).

To demonstrate what I mean:

"The actual duel is very short, how did you come to the conclusion it had to come this way?...(feloni) If you talk to a lot of people who sword fight, they'll tell you people who are very good don't have long fights. So that scene, its a homage to the 7th samurai. I think on one level people would be excited to see another prolonged lightsaber fight."
In addition to making clear what "growth" refers to, this alone indicates that they grew as duelists back from when they had "prolonged lightsaber duels". So there's no getting around this, Kenobi and Maul are better fighters than their tcw counterparts.

Now to address possible counters:

A. The context of the quote is clearly only referring to specifically maul and kenobi, so if you stretch this to being an indication of the, being superior to all fighters, you stretching this to such a ridiculous degree, it does'nt invalidate the quote

B. This reasoning works in conjunction with the other reasons for the shortness of the fight

C. If you think its just feloni bsing, too bad, its uncontradicted authority

D. The quote refers to them as swordsman which would inculde any physical degradement or specific weaknesses they have in comparison with their prior incarnations

So any favourable performances rebels characters have vs rebels maul simply raise them, they don't lower maul

Dude, no one was talking about that. But thanks anyway, I guess.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Dude, no one was talking about that. But thanks anyway, I guess.
Thor, Petrus are nobodies?...
damn, brutal

Not sure

Maul lost to Kanan and got destroyed in 3 moves

He is legit trash tier

Originally posted by carthage
Not sure

Maul lost to Kanan and got destroyed in 3 moves

He is legit trash tier
Ti got held by maul blitz fodder in magna guards

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
doesn't really matter. Rebels recon is publishe don sw.com, is released by the official youtube channel star wars prpose and feloni as the head of all animation projects has direct authority over rebels, so yea the quote's still canonical.
A for the quote:
This has been explained here in depth(here's the full video :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eIZsJsck7A). the shortness of the duel was

A. for storytelling purposes it was supposed to be symbolic of their respective growth as characters

B. Because maul and Kenobi and Mul had fought each other multiple times

C. Given the more realistic kind of fighting they styled this after, the shorter fight was chosen partially because the duo improved as duelists and in reali life very good fighters have short fights:

"The actual duel is very short, how did you come to the conclusion it had to come this way?...(feloni) If you talk to a lot of people who sword fight, they'll tell you people who are very good don't have long fights. So that scene, its a homage to the 7th samurai. I think on one level people would be excited to see another prolonged lightsaber fight. But I just never really saw the confrontation that way because to do that is to say the characters don't have growth "
Even if you want to interpret growth to not refer to their skill as duelists(even though the context is clearly about their ability as combatants), duelists" them being "very good" swordsman as a reason for the shorter fight compared to their longer "prolonged" fights in tcw clearly indicates growth. As this is referring to them as of their fight with each other this would factor maul's emotional state(even though logically, it would make him more powerful vs kenobi not less combatively speaking given how darksiders operate) and his physical degradement(which could have been canceled out with force augmentation).

To demonstrate what I mean:

"The actual duel is very short, how did you come to the conclusion it had to come this way?...(feloni) If you talk to a lot of people who sword fight, they'll tell you people who are very good don't have long fights. So that scene, its a homage to the 7th samurai. I think on one level people would be excited to see another prolonged lightsaber fight."
In addition to making clear what "growth" refers to, this alone indicates that they grew as duelists back from when they had "prolonged lightsaber duels". So there's no getting around this, Kenobi and Maul are better fighters than their tcw counterparts.

Now to address possible counters:

A. The context of the quote is clearly only referring to specifically maul and kenobi, so if you stretch this to being an indication of the, being superior to all fighters, you stretching this to such a ridiculous degree, it does'nt invalidate the quote

B. This reasoning works in conjunction with the other reasons for the shortness of the fight

C. If you think its just feloni bsing, too bad, its uncontradicted authority

D. The quote refers to them as swordsman which would inculde any physical degradement or specific weaknesses they have in comparison with their prior incarnations

So any favourable performances rebels characters have vs rebels maul simply raise them, they don't lower maul

However, Filoni also proceeds to say that he believes Kenobi is better than Maul, and that there's no way he would need to take longer than that to defeat him, so it's not far-fetched at all to conclude that he wanted to display Kenobi's growth and Maul's lack of it by making it this one sided. This would obviously mean that he's referring to Kenobi when he says 'real good swordsmen have short fights', not Maul because well, he's the one who got beat and who was stuck in the old ways.

^ Yes growth as characters is obviously referring more to Kenobi.

Any growth Maul had is clearly neutered by him being "Lost" and "Broken", also Filoni's words.

Going by Canon feats and showings though, Rebels Maul has nothing on TCW/SOD Maul.

Well, he did fight against three Inqs simultaneously and did quite well, and he's at least roughly on par with Rebels Ahsoka. I'd say TCW/SoD Maul is indeed superior, but not by much based on what we've seen from both iterations.

Originally posted by Petrus
However, Filoni also proceeds to say that he believes Kenobi is better than Maul, and that there's no way he would need to take longer than that to defeat him, so it's not far-fetched at all to conclude that he wanted to display Kenobi's growth and Maul's lack of it by making it this one sided. This would obviously mean that he's referring to Kenobi when he says 'real good swordsmen have short fights', not Maul because well, he's the one who got beat and who was stuck in the old ways.
A. Kenobi being better than maul doesn't prclude both from growing
B. Yes Kenobi didn't need longer to beat maul, in the context of the samurai esque fighting they were using
C. The context of the quote is referring to both of them.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang

C. The context of the quote is referring to both of them.


It's referring to both of them, but applies if just one has grown substantially and is now in his Prime, whilst the other just a grown a little, but overall is past his prime.

Nowhere does it state BOTH combatants are in their Prime, or that Both are more Powerful than they've ever been.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
A. Kenobi being better than maul doesn't prclude both from growing
B. Yes Kenobi didn't need longer to beat maul, in the context of the samurai esque fighting they were using
C. The context of the quote is referring to both of them.

A. Yeah, except that Filoni explicitly states that Maul at this point is 'lost and broken', which pretty much can be taken as the antonym of growth in this context.

B. Yes, which means Kenobi is so much better than Maul at this point and clearly not the other way around.

C. That's your interpretation; an interpretation which certainly isn't supported neither by what we see on screen nor by what Filoni says about both characters.

Originally posted by Petrus
A. Yeah, except that Filoni explicitly states that Maul at this point is 'lost and broken', which pretty much can be taken as the antonym of growth in this context.

B. Yes, which means Kenobi is so much better than Maul at this point and clearly not the other way around.

C. That's your interpretation; an interpretation which certainly isn't supported neither by what we see on screen nor by what Filoni says about both characters.
A. Maul was referred to being lost and broken as a character, not a combatant. This quote on the other hand is clearly in the context of them as lightsaber duelists.

B. That's not what the quote says. The context of the quote refers to the two as "people who are very good" as "characters", it never specifically refers to maul or kenobi or singles out either. The quote is clearly talking about both. The reason the fight was so short was because in addition to both progressing' they had fought each other multiple times(thus being able to anticipate each other)and feloni was trying to replicate samurai fighting

C. Feloni never says anything contradictory in the context of their abilities as combatants. Maul being broken as a character doesn't at all have to hinder(and could help) his combative abilities. Loss makes dark siders stronger.

The context of the quote never specifies kenobi or maul and uses words that can apply to both(swordsman) rather than words that would refer to one.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
A. Maul was referred to being lost and broken as a character, not a combatant. This quote on the other hand is clearly in the context of them as lightsaber duelists.



Actually he meant it's growth as characters which effects how they sword fight. Doesn't mean they're both in their Prime. That's never stated or even hinted at. (Even though Kenobi probably is). And Maul being "Lost and Broken" as a character will definitely effect his overall combat prowess. So will his body getting physically older and weaker.

So unless you have evidence to suggest Maul grew more powerful in the Force, you have no point here.

And again, Filoni isn't the final canon authority on power levels. It's the actual fight which shows us Rebels Kenobi > Rebels Maul. Not Filoni's commentary Lol

Being mentally "lost and broken" heavily implies he's inferior or even significantly than his previous iterations.

^ Exactly.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Actually he meant it's growth as characters which effects how they sword fight. Doesn't mean they're both in their Prime. That's never stated or even hinted at. (Even though Kenobi probably is). And Maul being "Lost and Broken" as a character will definitely effect his overall combat prowess. So will his body getting physically older and weaker.

So unless you have evidence to suggest Maul grew more powerful in the Force, you have no point here.

And again, Filoni isn't the final canon authority on power levels. It's the actual fight which shows us Rebels Kenobi > Rebels Maul. Not Filoni's commentary Lol
1. Which is meant to indicate why kenobi surpassed maul. It says nothing on maul becoming worse as a combatant(a clai,m he clearly doesn;t believe).

Feloni doesn't have to imply these incarnations being their prime here because in rebels recon, which is official star wars material, feloni speaking wholly in the context of their abilities as duelists did make it clear that both improved as duelists. Maul being inferior to rebels kenobi and him being superior to tcw maul aren't mutually exclusive.

2. In the absence of any evidence whatsoever indicating otherwise, feloni's authority absolutely takes precedent even if it wasn't on rebels recon. But given that this is given on rebels recon which is offically published on sw,com and released by the official sw youtube channel, its canonical.

Rebels Maul is>tcw maul at a minimum as a duelist.

Maul becoming more powerful over 15 years where he was troubling the empire, looking for holocrons, and collecting artififacts(hence being active), should be obvious but its not necessary because no one has provided any evidence to suggest maul become less powerful.

Maul lost to a Padawan, let that sink in

The last time a character was "lost and broken" he was reduced from potential Dooku stomper to Kenobi level. To affirm that he grew in general combative power but was mentally "broken and lost" are two contradictory statements.

Originally posted by TenebrousWay
Being mentally "lost and broken" heavily implies he's inferior or even significantly than his previous iterations.
you might have a point if the quote was comparing maul to previous versions of maul combatively. But mal being lost or broken doesn't mean he decreased as a combatant. Especially not when even tcw maul despite being broken and lost as of season 4 managed to have grow y the start of season 5.

And definitely not when its made clear by authority on a show thats official disney era star wars material that maul improved as a duelist

Originally posted by TenebrousWay
The last time a character was "lost and broken" he was reduced from potential Dooku stomper to Kenobi level. To affirm that he grew in general combative power but was mentally "broken and lost" are two contradictory statements.
Not the same thing, Anakin was reduced combatively because he was conflicted and hadn't fully embraced the darkside, unlike maul. Interestingly anakin partially unhindered himself whe n he started drawing on pain/desperation which forced kenobi to fully unhinder himself.

The same pain and dsperation that maul, who is fully a darksider(the reason why he's lost/broken as a character) would have available to him.

That isolated example only reinforces that maul grew stronger because maul unlike anakin is not conflicted as a darksider.

If being "lost and broken" isn't relevant to Maul's performance it wouldn't make sense to estabilish such psychological state in the first place. Filoni statements that "he's stuck on old ways (which refer to his previous iterations)", "lost and broken" and that he somehow improved in general combative ability are contradictory. He could've improved in certain aspects such as knowledge but, again, Filoni must be more clear if you want autorial opinions to affect our analyze of Maul.

The example of Anakin was given to show how the wrong psychological state can drastically affect combat prowess.

Originally posted by TenebrousWay
If being "lost and broken" isn't relevant to Maul's performance it wouldn't make sense to estabilish such psychological state in the first place. Filoni statements that "he's stuck on old ways (which refer to his previous iterations)", "lost and broken" and that he somehow improved in general combative ability are contradictory. He could've improved in certain aspects such as knowledge but, again, Filoni must be more clear if you want autorial opinions to affect our analyze of Maul.

The example of Anakin was given to show how the wrong psychological state can drastically affect combat prowess.
"he's stuck on old ways" APPLIES to his previous incarnations because those incarnai=tions would ALSO be sTuck in their old ways.

Lot and broken, as a darksider, is relevant to him being inferior to Kenobi who wasn't stuck in his old ways because as a jedi he let go and moved on. Maul never moved on or let go of what kenobi did to him, hence he's inferior. You can't use that as a basis to claim he's combatively weaker than his prior incarnations because those incarnations as darksiders have the exact same problems rebels maul have.

Feloni's authority of star wars material(canon) is different from this because it is specifically talking about maul(and kenobi) in reference to their previous versions. Furthermore they are referred to as swordsman, its never specifically qualified that he's talkng about a specific part of maul ability's improving so the quote refers to maul overall as a combatant.

The problem with the anakin example is that anakin actually improved when he started embracing the emotions maul being lost and broken as a character would present him: desperation/pain. Anakin was only hindered because of his past as a jedi/lightsider

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
"he's stuck on old ways" APPLIES to his previous incarnations because those incarnai=tions would ALSO be sTuck in their old ways.

I brought it up to show how questionable it is to affirm that someone improved and then, that he was stuck in "old ways". The context was particularly in reference to Filoni's assesment of Rebels' Maul. If and the degree the "stuck in old ways" of TCW's Maul potentially affected him wasn't clear by Filoni's reference.



Obi Wan did let go of what? Maul constantly remembering what Obi Wan did to him could fuel his rage and enhance his powers. If his inner rage didn't make him more powerful is because he didn't feel a primal rage towards Obi Wan anymore. Maul, by Rebels, is indeed broken and lost.



I'm not rationalizing what Filoni tried to explain, I'm giving my own explanation to how he could've done that without incurring in contradiction.



This is in contradiction to Filoni's assesment of Maul. Look at your second paragraph. By your logic being "lost and broken" would've increased Maul's performance but, according to Filoni, Maul was defeated because of that.

1. It isn't questionable. the context of the quote wasn't ever talking about maul in comparison to his previous incarnations, it was comparing maul to KENOBI, who as a lightsider wasn't "stuck in the old ways". The quote is answering why KENOBI surpassed and beat maul. There's nothing questionable here.

2. A. Let go of what maul's done to him(qui gon/satine), let go of what happened with anakin, let go of his entire surrogate family being destroyed?
B. Your claim that maul didn't grow more powerful is baseless and as I've shown, him being "lost and broken" as a character isn't a solid basis for that claim. Your, "he doesn't have that primal rage anymore" in addition to being making no sense because it would suggest rebels maul let go or at least partally moved on from what kenobi did to him which he clearly can't move past by virtue of the quote you're trying to use to create a non existent contradiction.


None of this speculation is neccesary, we have confirmation that maul progressed as a duelikst

3. There is no contradiction.

4. No its not, Feloni's logic isn't my logic for one thing. For another thing, maul losing to kenobi doesn't stop maul from being able to supersede his previous incarnations. SOD Maul is a darksider, Kenobi is not

Originally posted by carthage
Maul lost to a Padawan, let that sink in


So has Vader.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
1. Which is meant to indicate why kenobi surpassed maul. It says nothing on maul becoming worse as a combatant(a clai,m he clearly doesn;t believe).

Feloni doesn't have to imply these incarnations being their prime here because in rebels recon, which is official star wars material, feloni speaking wholly in the context of their abilities as duelists did make it clear that both improved as duelists. Maul being inferior to rebels kenobi and him being superior to tcw maul aren't mutually exclusive.


Wrong. By saying Maul was lost and broken, and by Maul himself reminiscing about his Past when his power was greater, it's clearly implied by both creator and character that Maul was past his prime.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
2. In the absence of any evidence whatsoever indicating otherwise, feloni's authority absolutely takes precedent even if it wasn't on rebels recon. But given that this is given on rebels recon which is offically published on sw,com and released by the official sw youtube channel, its canonical.


Rebels Recon is commentary by the creators just on their take on a specific episode. We watch it for insight, but don't cling onto every word as canon. Filoni isn't Lucas.

And even if he was, that doesn't give you the right to misinterpret one of his statements, whilst completely ignoring his other statements.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Rebels Maul is>tcw maul at a minimum as a duelist.


Canon says otherwise. Your desires and opinions are not canon.

SOD Maul being capable of engaging Mace Windu, but Rebels Maul being incapable of engaging Rebels Kenobi, is all Canon.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Maul becoming more powerful over 15 years where he was troubling the empire, looking for holocrons, and collecting artififacts(hence being active), should be obvious but its not necessary because no one has provided any evidence to suggest maul become less powerful.


These are all things made up by you. We've not once seen or heard of him learning more about the Force. Just chasing relics he already knew about.

He's Lost and Broken. He's desperate. In fact he's no longer a Darth.

So there's no reason whatsoever to believe Rebels Maul isn't past his Prime, but plenty of reasons to believe he is. You clinging to your own desires and interpretations doesn't make your wishes become Canon.

Was hoping for a rancor riding Shaak Ti, but I see The Force Unleashed isn't canon.

Huh, could have sworn it getting the canon blessing of George himself was a major part of the pre release hype.

Originally posted by cdtm
Was hoping for a rancor riding Shaak Ti.

Me too, beastality porns are the best.

Maul would get destroyed by Galen at any point per his loss to Kanan

Shaak Ti wins