Originally posted by Beniboybling
What it doesn't say is that Maul is the strongest of the team however, he could have just been one of the strongest, ultimately its not as if anyone present could say for sure.EDIT: Syn also makes a good point, the only thing we can be sure on is Ezra needed extra protection.That wasn't my point, my point was that despite fighting for a considerable amount of time, Maul failed to gain any advantage. That demonstrates parity no matter how you slice it.
And there is now quite a long list of explanations for the 5th Brother's performance, like 1. He was amped by a nexus 2. He had improved by some margin 3. Ahsoka was holding back to avoid killing him.
If he was only one of the strongest then he wouldn't he be the logical choice. It's actually very clear, they use "strength" as a criteria to split up the group, there is nothing else that indicates anything different.
We don't see the biggest part of the fight so saying he couldn't gain any kind of advantage is not confirmed (they also stop fighting immediately when the screen cuts back to them).
Do you know to which degree he was amped or how the "not killing attitude" was holding back Ahsoka? They could be very minimal or quite noticeable but we don't know.
Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
And why does that dismiss the possibility that Maul being the more logical choice has something to do with his knowledge of the temple's layout rather then his power? If they were to confront Inquisitors Maul could maneuver them to somewhere safer and thus be able to better protect Ezra.
Again 'strength' is the criteria used to split up the group, nothing else.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9Again you put too much stock in what is ultimately a decision made by the characters, how do they know Maul is the strongest? And the word "strength" is never mentioned, only Ezra's weakness, so naw.
If he was only one of the strongest then he wouldn't he be the logical choice. It's actually very clear, they use "strength" as a criteria to split up the group, there is nothing else that indicates anything different.We don't see the biggest part of the fight so saying he couldn't gain any kind of advantage is not confirmed (they also stop fighting immediately when the screen cuts back to them).
Do you know to which degree he was amped or how the "not killing attitude" was holding back Ahsoka? They could be very minimal or quite noticeable but we don't know.
If he gained an advantage he evidently subsequently lost it, considering they were fighting evenly when the fight resumed, and in fact Ahsoka briefly drove him back, so the point stands.
Considering Ahsoka goes from kicking his ass to not, I think that should answer both your questions.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Again you put too much stock in what is ultimately a decision made by the characters, how do they know Maul is the strongest? And the word "strength" is never mentioned, only Ezra's weakness, so naw.If he gained an advantage he evidently subsequently lost it, considering they were fighting evenly when the fight resumed, and in fact Ahsoka briefly drove him back, so the point stands.
Considering Ahsoka goes from kicking his ass to not, I think that should answer both your questions.
Because they've just witnessed him doing what they could not as a team (= stomping the Inquisitors without even mortally wounding them)? Are you really going to be that ignorant? They decided to split up the group and made paires according to strength, which is only as logical as it sounds, if you have actual prove that says otherwise please share it.
They stopped fighting so any advantage anyone had was lost.
Not really, he could have grown considerably since then while the nexus only amplifying his abilities slightly for example? The fact remains, you don't know.
Calm down dear, Ahsoka has stomped two of those Inquisitors already whereas Maul merely beat them back, so that's not very compelling. Whereas never is the word "strength" used to describe them splitting up the teams.
And if the advantage was Maul's he failed to regain it, instead if anything conceding it to Ahsoka. Either way it ultimately ended in a stalemate.
The point is there are plenty of explanations for the 5th Brother's performance, so what exactly is the problem?
Originally posted by Unbowed
The mental acrobatics some people are capable of...
Yeah. Pretty outstanding.
Strength was obviously the factor. The only factor to use against Maul (or in favour of Ahsoka), is that Maul was the strongest on a DS Nexus.
In any case Beni is right as well, that a level of parity was clearly shown when Maul and Ahsoka fought each other.
On the other hand Maul did seem convinced Ahsoka was running from him hmm
Well seems a pretty clear implication to me given no other factors were hinted at or even suggested for the weakest to be paired with Maul.
Like I said, if you have some anti-Maul or pro-Ahsoka agenda you always have the fact that it was likely a dark side nexus to explain Maul's superior strength in that scenario. But no point in batting aside a pretty clear and obvious implication.
Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Do the other factors have to be outright stated to be relevant for consideration?I really hate Ahsoka via my hate for Beni. And I love Kanan so if I was being biased I'd be wanking Maul.
I just don't think we should dismiss external factors tbh. It's bad logic.
Yes but What External factors? The ones not given to us or mentioned or even implied. And take them over the more clear and direct implication.. For reasons..