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

I think he would have been had he survived the Clone Wars.

Yeah I think he is stronger than the Grand Inquisitor

Krell would have stomped the crap out of GI.

Coming back to this after having read the Star Wars Inquisitors comic, and honestly I think the Grand Inquisitor would have kept his position even if Pong Krell had joined the Inquisitorius. The first issue of Inquisitors has the GI face a room full of Jedi elders, facing five at once and decisively winning. I'd say that's more impressive than Pong Krell losing to a squad of Clones.

By that logic, do you think ESB/RotJ Yoda was weaker than he would have been as a padawan? In that High Republic comic you mention, one of those elder Jedi outperformed Jedi Master Kantam Sy when it came to Force senses, reaction time, and telekinesis. Elder Jedi being past their physical prime doesn't mean they're so diminished that they're as weak as Padawans. And even if they were, taking on five padawans is still more impressive to me than what Pong Krell did (attacking a group of off-guard, non-Force sensitive clones and losing).

Jeez I need to read this series. How good does it make Kanan now to beat the GI ?

Might have just been a peak performance by Kanan though, and maybe GI was older (I.e. past his peak). Because IIRC Kanan never got the better of the 7th Sister.

But id be very surprised if Krell is not above the GI. That guy seemed beastly. In both strength and skill.

GI > Pong, definitely.

GI simply has far better feats against far more worthy opponents than a few clones... And it's especially true if GI scales above all the other Inquisitors in his ranks(like the one who throttled Asajj), which is a logical/reasonable assumption to make.

Originally posted by Galan007
And it's especially true if GI scales above all the other Inquisitors in his ranks(like the one who throttled Asajj), which is a logical/reasonable assumption to make. Why would we make that assumption though?

And wasn't Asajj out of practice and therefore weaker than her TCW levels?

Originally posted by Eli Vanto
Why would we make that assumption though? Because Inquisitors, like their Sith overlords, are all about the "power = rank" status quo. ie. the strongest leads; the weak serve -- and since GI was the leader of the Inquisitorius, we can logically infer that he was the most powerful among them. If another Inquisitor existed who was stronger than him, they would've held the "GI" title instead.

Originally posted by Eli Vanto
And wasn't Asajj out of practice and therefore weaker than her TCW levels? Could very well be... But has it actually been stated/confirmed that TotU Asajj < TCW Asajj to any significant degree? Legit question.

If not, then I wouldn't assume that she just automatically became weaker by default. Look at TotE Barriss, Rebels Ahsoka, and Rebels Kenobi, for example: Were they technically "out of practice" in the conventional sense? Sure. Were they "weaker" than before? No. Numerous characters just seem to naturally evolve their abilities over the course of time(with or without formal practice/training.) Just saying...

Tote Barriss went from holding her own against Anakin to being stomped by the GI. She was definitely weaker in the first episode of the show

Sure. She was majorly conflicted at that point.

I was talking about her aged "wise mother" progression by the end.

Oh yeah that Barriss looks OP

But who knows what kind of stuff she went through

Originally posted by Galan007
Could very well be... But has it actually been stated/confirmed that TotU Asajj < TCW Asajj to any significant degree? Legit question.

If not, then I wouldn't assume that she just automatically became weaker by default.

I would defo say we should absolutely assume that.

We dont always need some sort of official confirmation with some random quote. Her performance speaks for itself in comparison to how good she used to be.

I mean shes out duelled Grievous FGS.

I know Filonis statements arent in and of themselves canon, and this one might be outdated. But he did originally say the best Inquisitor is around Ventress level but probably still a little below. And he co-created the character as well as Inquisitors being a thing in canon.

Yeah, when Filoni made that statement it was 2015, so he was referring to TCW/DD Ventress as DD had just come out that year. So by scaling, DD/TCW Ventress>GI>TotU Inquisitor by default. TotU Ventress may legit be weaker than that inquisitor or maaaybe if the fight went on she may have used the dark side and force chocked him just like Barriss force chocked Dante in ToTE after he had stunned her

^ Yeah exactly. But she shouldn't have struggled that badly in the first place, so she defo wasn't at her peak. But then why would she be?

Having said that Galan is correct how it's focus and conflict and stuff that effects a Jedi/Sith. So clearly Obi-Wan at the start of his series wasn't in the right mindset, compared to Old Ben in Rebels, even though probably neither had fought properly in a few years.

So I'm guessing Ventress has her own internal conflicts at the start of ToTE.

That could very well be, as we've seen before... OR it could be the exact opposite, as we've seen before.

That's why I would just like to have explicit confirmation that TotE Asajj was in some way weakened, before I make that kind of assumption. /shrug

Yeah. Unfortunately they had to make Asajj somehow indebted to that Padawan, Lyco Strata. Still they could have written the fight differently, like she defeats the inquisitor after a brief but close exchange, she spares his life but he tries to backstab her as soon as she turns around, then Strata intervenes and kills him off.

Originally posted by Total Warrior
Yeah. Unfortunately they had to make Asajj somehow indebted to that Padawan, Lyco Strata. Still they could have written the fight differently, like she defeats the inquisitor after a brief but close exchange, she spares his life but he tries to backstab her as soon as she turns around, then Strata intervenes and kills him off.

Yeah they could have. Which makes me assume the intention there (not to sound like h1a8 from the comic book and movie versus forum) was to show shes out of shape/practice.

Originally posted by Total Warrior
Yeah. Unfortunately they had to make Asajj somehow indebted to that Padawan, Lyco Strata. Still they could have written the fight differently, like she defeats the inquisitor after a brief but close exchange, she spares his life but he tries to backstab her as soon as she turns around, then Strata intervenes and kills him off. Or even if the intent was always for that Inquisitor to just steamroll Asajj, a single mid-battle blurb from one of them is all it would have taken to confirm that she was not at her peak(similar to the blurbs made about Kenobi's power in the show)... But we got nothing of the sort. I find that kind of odd, if indeed TotE Asajj was intended to be massively nerfed. /shrug

That said, the assumption that TCW Asajj > TotE Asajj isn't baseless at all, but it's still just that: an assumption. Yes, some characters can/have become weaker if they've been 'out of practice' in the conventional sense, and/or if they're massively conflicted or whatever... But other characters have significantly improved over the course of time, despite being out of practice. That's all I'm saying.

Because the way I see it, this assumption:
"TCW Asajj > GI > random TotE Inquisitor > TotE Asajj"

...Really holds no more validity than this assumption:
"GI > random TotE Inquisitor > TotE Asajj ~/> TCW Asajj"

...Until we get some legitimate confirmation one way or the other, of course. Imo.


*I know Filoni's years-old statement about GI being "near" Ventress-level is a thing, but it's also possible that his opinion regarding powerlevels and whatnot has simply changed over the years(certainly wouldn't be the first time, lol.) Who tf knows anymore? ermm

But unless Filoni's opinions actually did do a complete 180 and he now has Inquisitors above Ventress for no reason, then it wouldn't make sense for GI and the others to have somehow become more powerful than TCW Ventress. It's not like their powers randomly got amped. :/

Originally posted by Eli Vanto
it wouldn't make sense for GI and the others to have somehow become more powerful than TCW Ventress. It's not like their powers randomly got amped. :/ Not true.

People tend to sleep on the fact that immediately after the Inquisitorius was formed, Vader began "instructing" GI, who then "instructed" the other Inquisitors:
https://ibb.co/8LqBdk7z

IOW, Vader himself was continuously training GI, who was then tasked with training the others. And given that Vader demanded mandatory progress, we can assume that any Inquisitor who was allowed to live was constantly growing their powers/abilities -- Vader literally made it part of their job description.

Point being: it is canonically possible for GI(and perhaps some of the others) to have surpassed Asajj. We know the type of rigorous training that Anakin put Ahsoka through back when he was still a devout Jedi, and we saw how brutal Vader was with the Inquisitorius when they 'sparred'. GI was routinely getting that level of training, and then taking it back to the others... For years.

*Not claiming that most Inquisitors weren't still fodder, mind you. Just saying that some of them were not... Or at least, the potential(and canonical precedence) is there for them to be leveled-up as needed.

Well either way, Kanan's a boss for defeating GI.

Originally posted by Galan007
Granted, that may still be a thing(ie. they're all weaker than TCW Ventress.) Just pointing out that a canon precedence has since been set for Inquisitors to be leveled-up if needed. That's fair.

Originally posted by Galan007
Well, random interviews/tweets and whatnot aren't irrefutably "canon" to begin with(as the storygroup has confirmed multiple times.) Published/officially licensed material is ultimately *the* authority.



That's true but I'd also be weary of written statements when it comes to power levels.

Like Lucasfilm will re-write comic history without hesitation when it comes to their Tv/Movie stuff, so I wouldn't expect Filoni (for example) to adhere to sourcebook quotes when directing his next fight between a Jedi and Sith.

Whereas at least director commentary gives us insight into the intention behind a fight (like when Ventress beat Grievous, it was Filoni's intention that she was just better, although we from the outside with other canon sources can speculate that it was because she is stronger on Dathomir).

The only real canon for power levels (IMO) is something everyone working at Lucasfilm understands, so for example the Emperor being the most powerful Dark Sider seems to be understood and accepted by anyone making a project.

That and of course previous fights that have been done. Like the fact that Kanan defeated the GI, that's canon and can't ever be changed.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
That's true but I'd also be weary of written statements when it comes to power levels.

Like Lucasfilm will re-write comic history without hesitation when it comes to their Tv/Movie stuff, so I wouldn't expect Filoni (for example) to adhere to sourcebook quotes when directing his next fight between a Jedi and Sith.

Whereas at least director commentary gives us insight into the intention behind a fight (like when Ventress beat Grievous, it was Filoni's intention that she was just better, although we from the outside with other canon sources can speculate that it was because she is stronger on Dathomir).

The only real canon for power levels (IMO) is something everyone working at Lucasfilm understands, so for example the Emperor being the most powerful Dark Sider seems to be understood and accepted by anyone making a project.

That and of course previous fights that have been done. Like the fact that Kanan defeated the GI, that's canon and can't ever be changed. What do you mean by "written statements"?

As for the rest: I see what you're saying for sure. Some writers/directors respect and adhere to preexisting canon. Others just do whatever the hell they want with the franchise. That holds true in pretty much all media, though... But in the case of SW specifically, it's all *supposed* to be on equal footing -- so the comics and games are just as canon as the movies and TV shows. Those are Disney's rules, not mine.

Anymore I just look at it as: the most recent info = the most canon info. If the more recent info outright contradicts/retcons the older info, then we just disregard the latter and use the former as our new gauge. /shrug

Originally posted by Galan007
What do you mean by "written statements"?


I thought you were saying that if it's written somewhere then it counts. Whilst anything spoken (by a director or someone) doesn't.

Originally posted by Galan007
As for the rest: I see what you're saying for sure. Some writers/directors respect and adhere to preexisting canon. Others just do whatever the hell they want with the franchise. That holds true in pretty much all media, though... But in the case of SW specifically, it's all *supposed* to be on equal footing -- so the comics and games are just as canon as the movies and TV shows. Those are Disney's rules, not mine.

Anymore I just look at it as: the most recent info = the most canon info. If the more recent info outright contradicts/retcons the older info, then we just disregard the latter and use the former as our new gauge. /shrug

Fair enough. Personally even though it's not stated I'm assuming an old EU Levels of Canon, simply because they so far haven't outright overwritten anything that you can watch on Tv. But even then I'm sure they'd ignore an episode of Rebels if it suited them before any live action. Certainly the movies will remain untouchable. So the whole G, T, C still seems to be in place even if they don't explicitly admit it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I thought you were saying that if it's written somewhere then it counts. Whilst anything spoken (by a director or someone) doesn't. Only if the written statements come from an officially published/licensed source, like a comic, novel, guidebook, etc. Then it is irrefutably canon.

Random online Q&A's and whatnot, though? Not so much(the Storygroup has been very clear about this.) Not saying these kind of sources aren't usable to some extent; just saying that licensed material always takes precedence.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Fair enough. Personally even though it's not stated I'm assuming an old EU Levels of Canon, simply because they so far haven't outright overwritten anything that you can watch on Tv. But even then I'm sure they'd ignore an episode of Rebels if it suited them before any live action. Certainly the movies will remain untouchable. So the whole G, T, C still seems to be in place even if they don't explicitly admit it. Disney's rule is literally "everything is equally canon"(outside of a few canon-adjacent works, like Visions and the Lego stuff, obvs.) There are no 'levels of canonicity', like there were in Legends.

That's why, when contradictions occur nowadays, we just default to using the most recent info provided, and essentially throw out what came before. So instead of trying to figure out where the contradicted material might fit within various tiers of canon(as was the case with Legends), we just consider it "retconned", and therefore inadmissible. This can be absolutely annoying at times, sure, but it really is a pretty simple system. /shrug

Agree with GI>Pong.

Originally posted by Galan007
Only if the written statements come from an officially published/licensed source, like a comic, novel, guidebook, etc. Then it is irrefutably canon.




Disney's rule is literally "everything is equally canon"(outside of a few canon-adjacent works, like Visions and the Lego stuff, obvs.) There are no 'levels of canonicity', like there were in Legends.




You see I find it very hard to take words like "irrefutable" and "equally canon" seriously when retcons clearly happen and when it's Only stuff outside of the movies and canon animated series that get retconned. They've made a rule which they're clearly not sticking to.

The Andor comics and the Andor Tv show were obviously not equal canon. The comic wasn't retconned because the Show came after, it was retconned because it wasn't seen as important as the show. It was not seen as necessary to be canon.
Whilst the Andor series did not and would not retcon Rogue One. So as with the old EU, comics and novels do their best to align with the movies and Tv stuff, whereas the movies and Tv stuff have the liberty to retcon the other stuff.

But that's just how I'm seeing it. I can see how it's easy to take your stance as "canon until retconned". And hey for these boards you make the rules!

Guidebooks usually leave room for interpretation, like Luke's journals was based on what he knew/thought, so not as much of an issue IMO.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
You see I find it very hard to take words like "irrefutable" and "equally canon" seriously when retcons clearly happen and when it's Only stuff outside of the movies and canon animated series that get retconned. They've made a rule which they're clearly not sticking to.

The Andor comics and the Andor Tv show were obviously not equal canon. The comic wasn't retconned because the Show came after, it was retconned because it wasn't seen as important as the show. It was not seen as necessary to be canon.
Whilst the Andor series did not and would not retcon Rogue One. So as with the old EU, comics and novels do their best to align with the movies and Tv stuff, whereas the movies and Tv stuff have the liberty to retcon the other stuff.

But that's just how I'm seeing it. I can see how it's easy to take your stance as "canon until retconned". And hey for these boards you make the rules!

Guidebooks usually leave room for interpretation, like Luke's journals was based on what he knew/thought, so not as much of an issue IMO. I see what you're saying, but retcons happen all the time in most fictional works. SW is no different in that regard -- it just seems to upset the fanbase more when contradictions occur in this franchise specifically. And it certainly can be annoying, I agree, but it is what it is. /shrug

And just to reiterate: the "everything is canon" rule isn't something I randomly came up with on my own. That is Disney's official stance on on the matter, whether people agree with it or not. I am only suggesting an easy/logical way to help others try and reconcile these retcons, when they inevitably occur(ie. the exact same way we'd handle anything else in fiction: the most current = the most canon.)