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

I heard there was a quote or an interview where this is said, anybody know where to find it? If it's true then I need to drop Maul a tier or two.

It's stated that Rebels Maul is more powerful but he's logically degraded both physically and in regards to technical skill which could explain his reduced ability as an overall combatant.

That makes sense.

TCW Maul still has his showings, so this hardly drops him.

So Rebels Maul getting beaten by a blinded Kanan isn't deserving of a drop?

He also stalemated Ahsoka, who went on to contend with Vader.

What do you think is more accurate in regards to his power?

Not sure. Maul is sometimes inconsistent. As for Ahsoka contending with Vader, no.

What's "no" supposed to mean? Because she did do it.

No meaning she didn't. Vader was obviously in control of the fight the entire time.

Sure he was. That's why we say he was at the advantage. It's not like it was a stalemate.

But if you hold your own for as long as she did, that's grounds enough to say that you contended with them. Or at least, when I refer to "contend".

Originally posted by SunRazer
TCW Maul still has his showings, so this hardly drops him.

Yes, he still has feats such as being unable to kill a helpless bounty hunter, and being floored by a dog, and being captured by a padawan

Losing to Kanan isn't worse than any of that. So it doesn't drop him

Maul never "stalemated" Ahsoka, we never see them beginning to fight when the screen cuts to Ezra en afterwards both Ahsoka and Maul have barely moved (contrary to when they actually start fighting they're jumping all over the place), indicating that they only started recently and not for a full 1 minute.

Originally posted by darthbane77
No meaning she didn't. Vader was obviously in control of the fight the entire time.

Originally posted by darthbane77
So Rebels Maul getting beaten by a blinded Kanan isn't deserving of a drop? Why do you feel the need to ignore circumstances regarding that? Please tell me. And TCW Maul has far more embarrassing showings, lmao.

Originally posted by darthbane77
No meaning she didn't. Vader was obviously in control of the fight the entire time. You're an idiot if you think Ahsoka's performance against Vader wasn't her contending with him.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Why do you feel the need to ignore circumstances regarding that? Please tell me. And TCW Maul has far more embarrassing showings, lmao.

You're an idiot if you think Ahsoka's performance against Vader wasn't her contending with him. What circumstances are you referring to exactly? Maul had Kanan dead to right and then he gets thrown off a cliff, that's pretty ****ing embarrassing for Maul.

Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Maul never "stalemated" Ahsoka, we never see them beginning to fight when the screen cuts to Ezra en afterwards both Ahsoka and Maul have barely moved (contrary to when they actually start fighting they're jumping all over the place), indicating that they only started recently and not for a full 1 minute.


Great. Take away his best Rebels era feat why don't ya

Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Maul never "stalemated" Ahsoka, we never see them beginning to fight when the screen cuts to Ezra en afterwards both Ahsoka and Maul have barely moved (contrary to when they actually start fighting they're jumping all over the place), indicating that they only started recently and not for a full 1 minute.

Originally posted by darthbane77
I heard there was a quote or an interview where this is said, anybody know where to find it? If it's true then I need to drop Maul a tier or two.

It was in an article on the Star Wars website, but it was written by a fan, not anyone with any sort of credibility. Unless we're thinking of different quotes...?

Originally posted by NewGuy01
It was in an article on the Star Wars website, but it was written by a fan, not anyone with any sort of credibility. Unless we're thinking of different quotes...? I'm not sure, I don't even know if the quote I'm looking for exists; I just heard it did and wanted to know.

I don't there's been a big change in his power level either way tbh.


Originally posted by Beniboybling



Yeah, I find it strange when Maul fans deny they were fighting pretty evenly, when that's actually Rebel Maul's best feat.

Without that he's just the guy who can take out Inquisitors, but loses to a blind Kanan.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I don't there's been a big change in his power level either way tbh.





Yeah, I find it strange when Maul fans deny they were fighting pretty evenly, when that's actually Rebel Maul's best feat.

Without that he's just the guy who can take out Inquisitors, but loses to a blind Kanan.

The barely fought on screen, you can't even come close to get a general idea of their standings out of that. Besides StarWars.com already confirmed Maul > Ahsoka so that's actually pretty good.

On fair ground, like most battle threads, Maul would destroy Kanan so you can't hold that against him.

Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
The barely fought on screen, you can't even come close to get a general idea of their standings out of that. Besides StarWars.com already confirmed Maul > Ahsoka so that's actually pretty good.


The implication was they'd been fighting for over a minute without either of them gaining ground. That's actually a pretty nice feat for Maul given that's on Filoni's show, and Filoni is admittedly biased towards Ahsoka whom he's turned into a powerhouse.

It wasn't a strong enough confirmation on StarWars.com IMO



Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
On fair ground, like most battle threads, Maul would destroy Kanan so you can't hold that against him.



It's not about holding it against him. It's about what Rebel Maul's greatest feat is. According to you it's beating Inquisitors, and then ending his debut episode with a terrible low showing.

Yes it should be a one-off, but it'd be nice for them to have Maul easily beating Kanan & Ezra to show that was clearly a one-off case.

D. Thor continuing to embarrass himself.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
The implication was they'd been fighting for over a minute without either of them gaining ground. That's actually a pretty nice feat for Maul given that's on Filoni's show, and Filoni is admittedly biased towards Ahsoka whom he's turned into a powerhouse.

It wasn't a strong enough confirmation on StarWars.com IMO

No that wasn't the implication, we never see them starting to fight and looking at how they, like you said, have barely moved when the screen cuts back to them. Considering that when we actually see them fight they're moving all over the place and clearly aren't staying in one place at all, it's more likely they only recently started to fight and not for anything close to a minute.

A confirmation is a confirmation, little to debate about it.



It isn't a low showing if circumstances are involved, that's my entire point. You can't compare Maul losing to Kanan with him beating Inquisitors (or fighting with Ahsoka) because the context is entirely different.

Agreed, it would.

So DD, what were they doing for that minute and a half? Exchanging numbers?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
So DD, what were they doing for that minute and a half? Exchanging numbers?


Ahsoka likes her bad boyz

D. Thor just takes it. The lack of pride in certain people is astonishing.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
So DD, what were they doing for that minute and a half? Exchanging numbers?

Who cares what they were doing, assuming they were fighting, especially when evidence points out otherwise, is just based on personal interpretation and preference.

facepalm

While assuming they were not is to accept an incredulous and indeed illogical premise. Sry, I'll pass.

... Is Duelist really trying to say that Ahsoka and Maul stood around for a minute and a half?

No I'm not, just pointing out what evidence tells us.

PS It was a minute

Wow. Dumb.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
... Is Duelist really trying to say that Ahsoka and Maul stood around for a minute and a half?


I'm telling ya, Maul was trying his luck before he started fighting her

I honestly think Maul actually became more powerful in Rebels. We see him wielding a brand new double-bladed lightsaber, which obviously means he at least to the liberty to build a new lightsaber, and I doubt he planned on building it without also planning to train and hone his skills somehow. This is made clear based on his definite advantage over the Inqs and his performance against Ahsoka.

^ True he seems to have kept up his skills. On the other hand we don't know how long he was stuck alone on Malachor, so he might have still been just a little off form. But up or down, there doesn't seem to be much of a power gap between TPM, TCW, SOD or Rebels Maul.

Btw is there anything in Canon stating TCW Maul > TPM Maul?

Because Shadow Conspiracy is Legends right? And IIRC that's the only source to place TCW Maul > TPM Maul.

Canon TPM Maul isn't that overwhelming since his feat of beating Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan is diminished. Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan as of TPM have almost nothing in Canon.

TCW Maul stalemating Obi-Wan is a better feat.

Originally posted by SunRazer
Canon TPM Maul isn't that overwhelming since his feat of beating Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan is diminished. Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan as of TPM have almost nothing in Canon.

TCW Maul stalemating Obi-Wan is a better feat.


It's a better feat to use for power scaling, yeah. But that doesn't necessarily make it a superior feat. Because TPM Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan Having nothing impressive doesn't necessarily mean they Were nothing impressive.

I didn't say they were worth nothing impressive. But the TCW Obi-Wan feat is better since he's just better in everything - logically, through feats, accolades, etc.

The argument that the TPM duo might be better than TCW Obi-Wan because "we don't know" is an appeal to ignorance and devoid of any logical or evidential basis.

Originally posted by SunRazer


The argument that the TPM duo might be better than TCW Obi-Wan because "we don't know" is an appeal to ignorance and devoid of any logical or evidential basis.


I didn't say they're better. I said just because we have nothing to power scale them against doesn't mean they are worse.
For example, Pre-DD everyone assumed Kenobi or Maul would stomp Vos in Canon, (because we never saw much of him). But turns out he was on their level.
Unfortunately though Canon is unlikely to give us much in terms of TPM era stories for us to learn more.

But for what it's worth, Qui-Gon has been referred as a "Powerful" Jedi Master more than once in Canon. And TPM novel goes to great lengths to praise his sword fighting skills, though I guess that's more Legends. And TPM Kenobi clearly wasn't fodder either, so adding him helps a significant amount.

The TPM novel isn't Canon. Heck, the TPM novel claims that Qui-Gon's master considered him the best of all the Jedi he had trained in 400 years. He's been retconned to Dooku.

As for your former point, yes, they're better, based on current evidence. The assumptions for Canon Vos were fine until DD came out, based on the evidence available at the time.

On the other hand, you're still relying on a "we don't know" case, which is very weak.

Originally posted by SunRazer


As for your former point, yes, they're better, based on current evidence. The assumptions for Canon Vos were fine until DD came out, based on the evidence available at the time.

It was a case of "we didn't know". Most would have assumed ROTS Kenobi would have stomped ROTS Vos, which turned out not to be the case.



Originally posted by SunRazer

On the other hand, you're still relying on a "we don't know" case, which is very weak.


Actually no, I've given a logical case not to simply write off the Qui-Gon/Ob-Wan duo. So better evidence is required for TCW Kenobi's superiority over that duo than simply "more feats". Power scaling is just as important as feats, and in the absence of proper power scaling we shouldn't just jump to conclusions which can't be argued. Because that would be assumptions based on ignorance as noted in Vos's case.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
It was a case of "we didn't know". Most would have assumed ROTS Kenobi would have stomped ROTS Vos, which turned out not to be the case.


Actually no, I've given a logical case not to simply write off the Qui-Gon/Ob-Wan duo. So better evidence is required for TCW Kenobi's superiority over that duo than simply "more feats". Power scaling is just as important as feats, and in the absence of proper power scaling we shouldn't just jump to conclusions.

Based on that showing in TCW being his only feats, yeah.

And no, my argument is never "more feats", but "better feats". And better accolades, scaling, etc.

We're not supposed to wait in the dark until new material comes out. We have to make judgment calls for the now.

Originally posted by SunRazer
We have to make judgment calls for the now.


Well we don't "have to" Lol

Anyway given Maul fought Kenobi in those chicken legs, I think it's a kind of irrelevant example for the majority/remainder of TCW Maul.

Originally posted by darthbane77
What circumstances are you referring to exactly? Maul had Kanan dead to right and then he gets thrown off a cliff, that's pretty ****ing embarrassing for Maul. *sigh* The fact that Kanan was in a state of Oneness. FPJ described the situation (IIRC) as if the Force was controlling Kanan in that moment.

Of course Kanan is no match for Maul Ordinarily.

That said, it was a real dick move by Filoni to have Maul beat that way.

Maul is a very inconsistent character in regards to feats, tbh.

If you include everything for him then yeah. But then you could say that for a lot of characters.

Yes, you could indeed. That's SW.

Yeah. Obi-Wan comes to mind in terms of inconsistency. And Maul is a peer of Kenobi's... Basically his Dark Side counterpart.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Yeah. Obi-Wan comes to mind in terms of inconsistency. And Maul is a peer of Kenobi's... Basically his Dark Side counterpart.

Stop this.

Originally posted by Ziggystardust
Stop this.


Truth hurts I see