Starkiller vs Darth Maul (melee combat only)

Yoda wasn't even using a lightsaber in that Infinities comic, he was using his stick, and Pablo Hidalgo also seems to think that Vader would beat ESB Yoda

Ok I gotta ask, is it just so hard to take what is written and shown rather than relying on author statements who they themselves have said their words hold no value? I'm pretty sure this has been said more than once.

Why do you guys try to use author statements when it ends up going nowhere? You folks clearly aren't going to agree right? But you would agree with what clearly happens on panel or in a novel yes?

If not, all this back and forth is utterly pointless...it's not going anywhere.

“The brawl to settle it all!”

Star Wars: Tales #9 Cover

Make sure you're here on September 12th, 2001 for the answer to the question on everyone's lips: "Who's tougher? Vader or Maul?" Let the battle begin!

Starwars.com - Tales #9 Item Description

Star Wars Tales #9 sets out the answer the heated fan debate -- who's tougher: Darth Maul or Darth Vader? Sith doctrine clearly states that there can only be one survivor in this match.

Starwars.com - September 2001 Comics 

One of the most imaginative and visually challenging of those stories was the spectacular fight for supremacy among the Sith between Darth Maul and Darth Vader as told in the third volume of the Star Wars Tales series. 

Star Wars: The Official Figurine Collection #45

Darth Maul vs Darth Vader was made and marketed as "the brawl to settle it all," a "fight for supremacy" and "the answer" to the heated fan debate, telling us that this is an accurate depiction of how a fight would have played out in continuity, meaning it's irrelevant that this never happened IU. Starwars.com (a page detailing all the comics coming out for the month (link), not written by Marz) and The Official Figurine Collection endorse this viewpoint - this isn't about one man's inferred intent. If sources also support your fanfics and other Infinities stories being answers to fan debates, I'll throw my support behind them. 

Also keep in mind that if this was pushed as the final word on a debate, they wouldn't be considering Vader vastly pre-prime - this would defeat the purpose of the project. Why market this as the answer to the fan debate if Vader just grew massively afterwards (a version that was already out) to a point where he could destroy Maul? They put it into an ANH era setting, but this is peak powers Vader.

All that says is that the comic sets out to answer the question of who'd win between Maul and Vader - the comic written by Ron Marz. Nothing in that article indicates that that is distinctly Lucasfilm's intent as opposed to the writers'.

Lucasfilm was perfectly happy to have "the brawl to settle it all" pasted on the cover, with Starwars.com summaries for the new comic releases including a similar statement - and there's no reason to handwave the official site's words, unless you believe they'd let out pretty specific misinformation twice on such a niche topic. Latham seems to be doing a solid job dealing with the Marz quotes, so there's no reason for me to touch on those.

Also keep in mind that if this was pushed as the final word on a debate, they wouldn't be considering Vader vastly pre-prime - this would defeat the purpose of the project. Why market this as the answer to the fan debate if Vader just grew massively afterwards (a version that was already out) to a point where he could destroy Maul? They put it into an ANH era setting, but this is peak powers Vader.

No, since Marz explicitly said he designed it to fit into continuity, so it's pre-ANH Vader:

I was especially drawn to the villains, Vader and Maul in particular. My favorite jobs were the Darth Maul mini with Jan Duursema, the Darth Vader story with Claudio Castellini from Star Wars Tales, and the Vader vs. Maul slugfest with Rick Leonardi and Terry Austin from Star Wars Tales. Those last two are “non-canon” stories by virtue of appearing in Star Wars Tales, but I wrote them so they could easily fit into the existing continuity. Ironically, probably one of the few times in my career that I’ve been overly concerned with continuity

- http://ronmarz.com/tag/darth-maul/

So a prepared Maul on advantageous ground (small, narrow islands in lava that limited Vader's movement) was beating pre-ANH Vader in a pure saber contest, and yet even then Vader did very well despite being at a significant advantage for nigh on the entire duel. 

The story is timestamped pre-ANH, so there's no way it's ROTJ Vader level, lol.

Doesn’t matter if it’s designed to fit into continuity or not, it isn’t in continuity and is made expressly to settle the brawl. It’s RotJ Vader.

Meatpants wrote:Doesn’t matter if it’s designed to fit into continuity or not, it isn’t in continuity and is made expressly to settle the brawl. It’s RotJ Vader.

Boi we could say the same thing about Hildalgo saying Fisto smacks Maul and Vader smacks Yoda, we don’t get to pick and choose things it’s either one way or the other

@BoD No, since Marz explicitly said he designed it to fit into continuity, so it's pre-ANH Vader. So a prepared Maul on advantageous ground (small, narrow islands in lava that limited Vader's movement) was beating pre-ANH Vader in a pure saber contest, and yet even then Vader did very well despite being at a significant advantage for nigh on the entire duel. The story is timestamped pre-ANH, so there's no way it's ROTJ Vader level, lol.

 
Ron Marz used that version of Vader to fit the story within continuity, but this was thrown out of Legends Canon years ago, so the versions of these characters aren't bound by such limitations. Perhaps this is still what Ron wants, but we're beyond talks of individual author's intent in this debate; Starwars.com and The Official Figurine Collection took that fight and went with it, as far as using it as the decider on Maul vs Vader period - Marz can't overwrite that. On the topic of Marz's intent, I'm sure he didn't also envision that Vader would grow far formidable after this, leaving this fight meaningless. But otherwise good points, this is widely recognised as the definitive answer to the big fan debate, only Vader was hindered, Maul had the environmental edge, it was limited to lightsabers only, Vader had mega growth afterwards and basically everything sucks for him right? 

So a prepared Maul on advantageous ground (small, narrow islands in lava that limited Vader's movement) was beating pre-ANH Vader in a pure saber contest

The terrain is such a hindrance to Vader, such a boon to Maul... that Vader follows him through the place, continuing to fight in parts where he's at his weakest and his opponent, strongest? We know there is plenty of space in the upper terrace - where the fight begins - and from there Vader can take it outside (unless of course, Vader isn't strong enough to do that) where there's more breathing room than he could ever need. 



If Vader thought he was at a disadvantage, he would have changed the location while Maul was running off after the bridge collapse, jumping back up to the area where the duel began or leading Maul outside. Vader isn't obligated to follow Maul, and absolutely wouldn't if he thought it would limit him (he's having a tough enough time on equal ground), nothing is forcing him. So, does Vader willfully tail Maul to a location he can see and knows will hamper his prowess, or is it just a non factor? Is Vader silly? Is BoD wrong? Are both silly and wrong?

The fight was a "pure saber contest" because that's all it could be, nothing else Vader could've used against Maul would have lent him any advantage - slimy framing, nice try though. Vader isn't above using the cheap telekinetic trick of flicking the triggers on Stormtroopers' blasters to try and tag Maul, nor is he against Force-smashing the rock Maul was on, but he is above attempting to use the Force on Maul directly? Why not cut off augmentation too? This is to determine who is the stronger apprentice, so why would a battle limited to swords be a better way to prove superiority than a struggle of Force powers and lightsaber skill? Are you telling me that Sidious and the Prophets would see Vader rip Maul to shreds with the Force and claim it doesn't count and he's still weaker anyway? If the circumstances are so skewed against Vader from the beginning, would he not realise this and take it as a license to even things up, perhaps by using the Force more directly? When the beaten Vader has a triumphant Maul towering over him like a master would his whipped slave, and risks stabbing himself through the gut instead of pushing Maul into a lava pit, wouldn't you say that's a bit weird?  If only Sha Koon had asked Vader nicely to not use the Force, he would have had no choice but to gift her the win. I could keep going with the questions but the point is clear; Vader does use the Force in this contest, and is unable to touch Maul directly.

and yet even then Vader did very well despite being at a significant advantage for nigh on the entire duel.

Vader did "pretty well" insofar as cutting Maul's saberstaff in two, holding his ground, and being more of an equal than the Prophets thought he would be, which isn't saying much. Maul lands five, maybe six strikes compared to Vader's finisher and hilt split, and as soon as the double-blade is replaced with two separate ones, it's goodnight. Maul drops Vader nearly immediately;





Whether the saberstaff is particularly ineffective against Vader, dual blades are particularly strong, or Vader is just out of juice by the end of duel, Maul still comes out on top.

Your interpretation relies on Vader holding back and deliberately hindering himself in a number of ways, mine simply follows the words of the official Star Wars site. Vader is only as good as the man repping him and luckily for me, that is BreakofDawn  

CuckedCurry wrote:

Meatpants wrote:Doesn’t matter if it’s designed to fit into continuity or not, it isn’t in continuity and is made expressly to settle the brawl. It’s RotJ Vader.

Boi we could say the same thing about Hildalgo saying Fisto smacks Maul and Vader smacks Yoda, we don’t get to pick and choose things it’s either one way or the other

Star Wars: Head to Head still puts up their verdicts with statements like this;

So, we ask you: what's the verdict? What's your expert opinion? Who would win in a 'saber-swinging, Force-ful fight between the Skywalker legends? 

Starwars.com - Like Father, Like Son? Skywalkers Clash in Star Wars: Head to Head

So, we ask you: what's the verdict? What's your expert opinion? Who would win in a knock-down, drag-out fight between the furry fierce fighter from the Falcon, and the white woolly warrior of the winter wilds?

Starwars.com - The Fur Will Fly! Chewbacca and a Wampa Go Head to Head

They give you a suggestion and let you come to your own conclusion, while Resurrection is "the answer" to the debate.

BoD wrote:

I might not agree with BoD on the importance on the reason why the Vader vs Maul comic was published, but I do agree that the statements about why the comic was published do not automatically mean that the comic is using prime Vader. All the sources that say ESB/RotJ Vader is stronger than ANH Vader came after the comic was published, so ESB/RotJ Vader being capped at TPM Maul is taking things too far.

@Jake wrote:If Vader thought he was at a disadvantage, he would have changed the location while Maul was running off after the bridge collapse, jumping back up to the area where the duel began or leading Maul outside. Vader isn't obligated to follow Maul, and absolutely wouldn't if he thought it would limit him (he's having a tough enough time on equal ground), nothing is forcing him. So, does Vader willfully tail Maul to a location he can see and knows will hamper his prowess, or is it just a non factor? Is Vader silly? Is BoD wrong? Are both silly and wrong?

The fight was a "pure saber contest" because that's all it could be, nothing else Vader could've used against Maul would have lent him any advantage - slimy framing, nice try though. Vader isn't above using the cheap telekinetic trick of flicking the triggers on Stormtroopers' blasters to try and tag Maul, nor is he against Force-smashing the rock Maul was on, but he is above attempting to use the Force on Maul directly? Why not cut off augmentation too? This is to determine who is the stronger apprentice, so why would a battle limited to swords be a better way to prove superiority than a struggle of Force powers and lightsaber skill? Are you telling me that Sidious and the Prophets would see Vader rip Maul to shreds with the Force and claim it doesn't count and he's still weaker anyway? If the circumstances are so skewed against Vader from the beginning, would he not realise this and take it as a license to even things up, perhaps by using the Force more directly? When the beaten Vader has a triumphant Maul towering over him like a master would his whipped slave, and risks stabbing himself through the gut instead of pushing Maul into a lava pit, wouldn't you say that's a bit weird?  If only Sha Koon had asked Vader nicely to not use the Force, he would have had no choice but to gift her the win. I could keep going with the questions but the point is clear; Vader does use the Force in this contest, and is unable to touch Maul directly.

Excellent post. To add more to this, Vader is not a clumsy, slow robot who is suddenly doomed when fighting in such an environment, Vader has Force augmentation, Force sense and has been wearing that cybernetic suit for 19 years. His suit has been said to give him great mobility:

"Impulse generators lacing the armor provided electrical impulses to stimulate Vader's muscles, providing him with great mobility and strength despite his severely damaged muscles and nerves." -- The New Essential Guide To Weapons And Technology.

The rocks that Maul and Vader fought on were actually quite wide and open. They weren't even fighting on those rocks for the entire fight, in the first 6 pages of their fight, they were fighting in the fortress, an even wider and more open environment, and even in that location, Maul was the one who kicked and punched Vader (breaking his guard twice in a row) whereas Vader failed to inflict the same damage against Maul, showing that Maul was outmatching Vader regardless of where they were fighting.

Moreover, the argument that Vader's movements were limited by the rocks on the lava actually backfires when you think about it. For argument's sake, even if Vader's movements were limited by the rocks on the lava, Maul would also be limited by the rocks because his fighting style is more acrobatic than Vader's fighting style, and Maul's main Form is Juyo, whereas Vader's main Form is Djem So. Form VII has been described as more open and kinetic than Form V:

"Form VII employs bold, direct movements, more open and kinetic than Form V, but so eleborate in appearance as the acrobatic Form VII. Unlike Form V, Form VII requires greater energy because the focus is wielded more broadly, and draws upon a deeper well of emotion; while the outward bearing of a Form VII practitionor is one of calm, the inner pressure verges on explosion." -- Jedi vs Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force.

So it's pretty contrived to argue that Vader's movements were limited were limited by the rocks, but Maul's movements weren't limited by the rocks even though he is a notoriously more acrobatic fighter who specialises in a Form more open and kinetic than the Form that Vader specialises in.

@Latham2000

We aren't actually told whether it was Lucasfilm or Ron Marz who came up with the idea of the Maul vs Vader comic, but the comic itself was officially licensed, the old Star Wars website was obviously authorised by Lucasfilm editors, whereas Ron Marz tweets are written by Ron and no editors from Lucasfilm. That's the difference between using StarWars.com and Ron's tweets.

If you acknowledge it's ambiguous whose intent it is, then I don't see the relevance of appealing to Lucasfilm's supposed intent when it isn't clear. Your supplementary points that the comic was licensed and the website maintained by Lucasfilm employees aren't adequate refutations of what I've pointed out: "All that says is that the comic sets out to answer the question of who'd win between Maul and Vader - the comic written by Ron Marz. Nothing in that article indicates that that is distinctly Lucasfilm's intent as opposed to the writer's."

That's what I meant, Ron didn't realise that by "powered up" meant "boosted" i.e. amped beyond baseline powers until the person asked if Maul was boosted.

I found was these definitions for "power(ed) up:

This is fair.

@Jake

Jake wrote:

“The brawl to settle it all!”

Star Wars: Tales #9 Cover

Make sure you're here on September 12th, 2001 for the answer to the question on everyone's lips: "Who's tougher? Vader or Maul?" Let the battle begin!

Starwars.com - Tales #9 Item Description

Can you post a link to the second quote? Wookieepedia lists it as a publisher's summary, which is also what I found on Dark Horse's website. Regarding the first one, the only difference between that and most other publisher blurbs seems to be that it's on the front cover instead of on the back cover, which to me is a fairly arbitrary distinction and shouldn't be grounds for treating it different from other blurbs. I don't personally know what your stance on publisher's summaries is, but they include statements like this:



Darth Bane is "far more powerful" than a collective of 20,000 Sith Lords and wields "the awesome power of the dark side as never before." Other blurbs label him "the most powerful Sith Lord ever," an accolade shared by Darth Plagueis by way of blurbs as well. That's what, in your words, "Lucasfilm was perfectly happy to have" "pasted on the cover" of these books. Again, you might be perfectly fine with this, but in that case this still serves as a deterrent for all TOR wankers who're thinking of employing this line of argumentation against Vader in the future.

Star Wars Tales #9 sets out the answer the heated fan debate -- who's tougher: Darth Maul or Darth Vader? Sith doctrine clearly states that there can only be one survivor in this match.

Starwars.com - September 2001 Comics

As I've already pointed out, "All that says is that the comic sets out to answer the question of who'd win between Maul and Vader - the comic written by Ron Marz. Nothing in that article indicates that that is distinctly Lucasfilm's intent as opposed to the writer's." I don't get what supposed misinformation you're referring to in your rebuttal that "there's no reason to handwave the official site's words, unless you believe they'd let out pretty specific misinformation twice on such a niche topic." Clarification is in order.

One of the most imaginative and visually challenging of those stories was the spectacular fight for supremacy among the Sith between Darth Maul and Darth Vader as told in the third volume of the Star Wars Tales series.

Star Wars: The Official Figurine Collection #45

Perhaps there's more context to this than is apparent from your snippet, but this does not say "The fight between Darth Maul and Darth Vader in Star Wars Tales issue 9 is an accurate depiction of how it would play out in continuity," or anything along those lines. All we're told is that it's a "spectacular fight for supremacy" which it absolutely is in the story - but the story itself is non-canon. This is by far the weakest of your citations as it doesn't even give a clue to the "intent" of the Lucasfilm; it's just telling us what happens in the comic.

Darth Maul vs Darth Vader was made and marketed as "the brawl to settle it all," a "fight for supremacy" and "the answer" to the heated fan debate, telling us that this is an accurate depiction of how a fight would have played out in continuity, meaning it's irrelevant that this never happened IU. Starwars.com (a page detailing all the comics coming out for the month (link), not written by Marz) and The Official Figurine Collection endorse this viewpoint - this isn't about one man's inferred intent. If sources also support your fanfics and other Infinities stories being answers to fan debates, I'll throw my support behind them.

Those who've known my stances for longer are aware, but I suppose I should make it clear for the record that I'm not a proponent of authorial intent in any form. To me it's an entirely arbitrary standard that isn't codified down anywhere as something that should be accepted as a canonical, and it isn't included in the Holocron rankings used by this forum, with story group member Matt Martin outright repudiating it in favor of the source material twice over - and the source material in this case is unequivocally non-canon. The attempt here to establish a more authoritative "Lucasfilm intent" doesn't work because two of your statements are the equivalent of blurbs, the starwars.com article is ambiguous in that it might simply be referring to Ron Marz's intent, and The Official Figurine Collection # 45 doesn't even comment on the matter. If you can provide a statement from a canonical source that clearly states "The fight between Darth Maul and Darth Vader in Star Wars Tales issue 9 is an accurate depiction of how it would play out in continuity," I'll concede here. But as it stands, I'm not convinced.

@Azronger:

If you acknowledge it's ambiguous whose intent it is, then I don't see the relevance of appealing to Lucasfilm's supposed intent when it isn't clear. Your supplementary points that the comic was licensed and the website maintained by Lucasfilm employees aren't adequate refutations of what I've pointed out: "All that says is that the comic sets out to answer the question of who'd win between Maul and Vader - the comic written by Ron Marz. Nothing in that article indicates that that is distinctly Lucasfilm's intent as opposed to the writer's."

You're dancing around the issue now. You're insinuating that this was exclusively Ron Marz intent and Lucasfilm didn't agree with it even though they gave him license to write the comic. If Lucasfilm didn't agree, when why would Lucasfilm staff write "Star Wars Tales #9 sets out the answer the heated fan debate -- who's tougher: Darth Maul or Darth Vader? Sith doctrine clearly states that there can only be one survivor in this match" --> on the old official Star Wars website (link to article), which is included in Leland Chee's Holocron and is C canon in case you forgot, to answer the Vader vs Maul fan debate... that occurs and continues to occur on the kind of forums we make a hobby out of going on:

"The Holocron is an internal database maintained by Lucas Licensing that tracks all the fictional elements created for the Star Wars universe. The database includes material from the films, books, comics, videogames, trading cards, roleplaying games, websites, toys, cartoons, and just about every officially sanctioned fictional element of the Star Wars universe.

[...]

...continuity ”C” canon which is pretty much everything else. ” By everything else I mean EVERYthing else. Novels, comics, junior novels, videogames, trading card games, roleplaying games, toys, websites, television. As I've mentioned earlier, any contradictions that arise are dealt on a case-by-case." ― Leland Chee

Can you post a link to the second quote? Wookieepedia lists it as a publisher's summary, which is also what I found on Dark Horse's website. Regarding the first one, the only difference between that and most other publisher blurbs seems to be that it's on the front cover instead of on the back cover, which to me is a fairly arbitrary distinction and shouldn't be grounds for treating it different from other blurbs. I don't personally know what your stance on publisher's summaries is, but they include statements like this:

Darth Bane is "far more powerful" than a collective of 20,000 Sith Lords and wields "the awesome power of the dark side as never before." Other blurbs label him "the most powerful Sith Lord ever," an accolade shared by Darth Plagueis by way of blurbs as well. That's what, in your words, "Lucasfilm was perfectly happy to have" "pasted on the cover" of these books. Again, you might be perfectly fine with this, but in that case this still serves as a deterrent for all TOR wankers who're thinking of employing this line of argumentation against Vader in the future.

You can view it (here) Starwars.com (The Cargo Bay subsection which is apart of the main of site, full of Hyperspace logos, as well as 'LucasFilm' and 'LucasOnline' text, making it as legitimate as anything else) gave Tales #9 a description that matched the summary, making it an endorsement. This goes back to the misinformation point; the official star wars website wouldn't allow content that is peddling lies - unless we're talking about fan/author/artist comments, which are quoted - regardless of the site section. For further proof we can see this in practice, as they don't allow the summaries of select items to remain (1)(2)(3)meaning there is some selectivity to what is and isn't included on the site. They could have removed, edited, or never even added the description of Resurrection, but chose to include it anyway. The Bane example is fine, if a bit extreme, so instead consider the cover just a piece of evidence of dubious canonicity supporting Starwars.com's quotes.

As I've already pointed out, "All that says is that the comic sets out to answer the question of who'd win between Maul and Vader - the comic written by Ron Marz. Nothing in that article indicates that that is distinctly Lucasfilm's intent as opposed to the writer's." I don't get what supposed misinformation you're referring to in your rebuttal that "there's no reason to handwave the official site's words, unless you believe they'd let out pretty specific misinformation twice on such a niche topic." Clarification is in order.

This isn't only Marz, it's not just one man who has to work on and approve material. Marz set out to answer the heated fan debate and Lucasfilm not only gave the comic's creation the green light under this premise, but included that fact on the official Star Wars site. Whether it's Marz's intent or not, that was LFL endorsed and promoted. The misinformation point was in reference to BoD's dismissal of Starwars.com as unreliable because they use third-party authors, but the 'upcoming comics' section was a monthly, ongoing series for years, not some one-off blog post made by a random writer/fan - which I'm not sure was even allowed in 2001. More on the second 'misinformation' source is above.

Perhaps there's more context to this than is apparent from your snippet, but this does not say "The fight between Darth Maul and Darth Vader in Star Wars Tales issue 9 is an accurate depiction of how it would play out in continuity," or anything along those lines. All we're told is that it's a "spectacular fight for supremacy" which it absolutely is in the story - but the story itself is non-canon. This is by far the weakest of your citations as it doesn't even give a clue to the "intent" of the Lucasfilm; it's just telling us what happens in the comic.

The Figurine Collection says it is "the spectacular fight for supremacy among the Sith between Darth Maul and Darth Vader." The Sith Darth Maul and Darth Vader - not phantom or illusory ones - just the two characters going at it in a fight to see who is strongest. Taken at face value, the most simple and honest interpretation of this quote is telling us that it's the two base combatants in a fight to see who is best. The quote doesn't need to be tossed aside because it isn't explicitly stating that it's "an accurate depiction of how it would play out in continuity," we can infer that this is what the source is telling us by their use of regular Darth Vader, regular Darth Maul, and 'fight for supremacy.' It's a C Canon source that Lucasfilm also approved, giving us information on the events of a comic that they accepted as the final word on Vader vs Maul. 

Those who've known my stances for longer are aware, but I suppose I should make it clear for the record that I'm not a proponent of authorial intent in any form. To me it's an entirely arbitrary standard that isn't codified down anywhere as something that should be accepted as a canonical, and it isn't included in the Holocron rankings used by this forum, with story group member Matt Martin outright repudiating it in favor of the source material twice over - and the source material in this case is unequivocally non-canon. The attempt here to establish a more authoritative "Lucasfilm intent" doesn't work because two of your statements are the equivalent of blurbs, the starwars.com article is ambiguous in that it might simply be referring to Ron Marz's intent, and The Official Figurine Collection # 45 doesn't even comment on the matter. If you can provide a statement from a canonical source that clearly states "The fight between Darth Maul and Darth Vader in Star Wars Tales issue 9 is an accurate depiction of how it would play out in continuity," I'll concede here. But as it stands, I'm not convinced.

The target audience for these arguments obviously isn't going to be you, or anyone who thinks like you. But for everyone else; Resurrection's purpose from the beginning was to answer the question, who is tougher; Darth Vader or Darth Maul? LFL accepted this point, as well as the events of the fight that show Maul in a favourable light, and promoted it under the idea that it would be the final word. This was on Starwars.com twice - where it would never have been added, and could have been removed, if it didn't match their vision like the other summaries - and The Official Figurine Collection. That's three quotes all leaning the same way, trying to tell us something, and anyone attempting to pin this all on Marz as the sole actor is mistaken or dishonest.

What in the hell is even being argued about now? This has gone so far from the fight topic at hand.

Zenwolf wrote:What in the hell is even being argued about now? This has gone so far from the fight topic at hand.

They seem to be arguing weather the Maul and Vader fight should be considered valid or not. I’d personally say no sense “author intent” is not enough proof for counting something that feats and scaling as well as other author statements disagree with. By this logic Thor is now strong enough to one hit kill the Hulk because he did that to someone who was said to be as powerful as the Hulk in the God of Thunder storyline or if you want a more Star Wars example of this then in the Courtship of Leia Luke Skywalker himself while bleeding from the head to death says that this was what would have happened had Vader tried to kill him and the book goes on to say and I quote here “Luke was no warrior” which would basically contradict Lucas‘s original plan; I have no problem with Maul being above Vader but that would also mean Vader is above Yoda because he killed him in the Infinities comic and it would also mean Luke wasn’t even a proper warrior. The point is the author intent doesn’t get you anywhere.

AlakanSpacewalker wrote:

Zenwolf wrote:What in the hell is even being argued about now? This has gone so far from the fight topic at hand.

They seem to be arguing weather the Maul and Vader fight should be considered valid or not. I’d personally say no sense “author intent” is not enough proof for counting something that feats and scaling as well as other author statements disagree with. By this logic Thor is now strong enough to one hit kill the Hulk because he did that to someone who was said to be as powerful as the Hulk in the God of Thunder storyline or if you want a more Star Wars example of this then in the Courtship of Leia Luke Skywalker himself while bleeding from the head to death says that this was what would have happened had Vader tried to kill him and the book goes on to say and I quote here “Luke was no warrior” which would basically contradict Lucas‘s original plan; I have no problem with Maul being above Vader but that would also mean Vader is above Yoda because he killed him in the Infinities comic and it would also mean Luke wasn’t even a proper warrior. The point is the author intent doesn’t get you anywhere.

I don't really see why Maul being above Vader at this point in time is such a bother to some. Even if taking into account the fight, Maul outdid him with his agility and speed, something which...well many Jedi/Force Users have shown to have over Vader during this time period and going forward soo.....why is this now suddenly such an issue?

Plus more to that, this is still one of the deadliest Sith in history so...again...I'm not seeing what the issue is here?

Even if we don't take this fight into account and set the same perimeters....well you would still have the same things going. Maul has agility/speed over Vader's durability and strength, which again, a great many others have over Vader in similar encounters, the only difference is that these Jedi aren't nearly as skilled nor as fast/agile as Maul.

This is kinda going back and forth, I'm not seeing any give from either, so would it be so bad to just move on? This thread isn't Vader and Maul, this is about Starkiller vs Maul.

AlakanSpacewalker wrote:

They seem to be arguing weather the Maul and Vader fight should be considered valid or not. I’d personally say no sense “author intent” is not enough proof for counting something that feats and scaling as well as other author statements disagree with. By this logic Thor is now strong enough to one hit kill the Hulk because he did that to someone who was said to be as powerful as the Hulk in the God of Thunder storyline or if you want a more Star Wars example of this then in the Courtship of Leia Luke Skywalker himself while bleeding from the head to death says that this was what would have happened had Vader tried to kill him and the book goes on to say and I quote here “Luke was no warrior” which would basically contradict Lucas‘s original plan; I have no problem with Maul being above Vader but that would also mean Vader is above Yoda because he killed him in the Infinities comic and it would also mean Luke wasn’t even a proper warrior. The point is the author intent doesn’t get you anywhere.

When we said "intent" we were clearly referring to Lucasfilm's intent, not Ron Marz' intent. And Vader cutting off Yoda's arm in the Infinities comic means very little when you take into account that Vader was armed with a lightsaber, whereas Yoda was armed with a wooden stick.

Latham2000 wrote:

AlakanSpacewalker wrote:

They seem to be arguing weather the Maul and Vader fight should be considered valid or not. I’d personally say no sense “author intent” is not enough proof for counting something that feats and scaling as well as other author statements disagree with. By this logic Thor is now strong enough to one hit kill the Hulk because he did that to someone who was said to be as powerful as the Hulk in the God of Thunder storyline or if you want a more Star Wars example of this then in the Courtship of Leia Luke Skywalker himself while bleeding from the head to death says that this was what would have happened had Vader tried to kill him and the book goes on to say and I quote here “Luke was no warrior” which would basically contradict Lucas‘s original plan; I have no problem with Maul being above Vader but that would also mean Vader is above Yoda because he killed him in the Infinities comic and it would also mean Luke wasn’t even a proper warrior. The point is the author intent doesn’t get you anywhere.

When we said "intent" we were clearly referring to Lucasfilm's intent, not Ron Marz' intent. And Vader cutting off Yoda's arm in the Infinities comic means very little when you take into account that Vader was armed with a lightsaber, whereas Yoda was armed with a wooden stick.

Still an intent contradicted by basic feats of Vader’s and Maul’s. And the most powerful Jedi of all time doesn’t need a lightsaber to fight someone who is only Darth Maul level, he could just use the Force (which he did yet Vader powered through that).

AlakanSpacewalker wrote:

Latham2000 wrote:

AlakanSpacewalker wrote:

They seem to be arguing weather the Maul and Vader fight should be considered valid or not. I’d personally say no sense “author intent” is not enough proof for counting something that feats and scaling as well as other author statements disagree with. By this logic Thor is now strong enough to one hit kill the Hulk because he did that to someone who was said to be as powerful as the Hulk in the God of Thunder storyline or if you want a more Star Wars example of this then in the Courtship of Leia Luke Skywalker himself while bleeding from the head to death says that this was what would have happened had Vader tried to kill him and the book goes on to say and I quote here “Luke was no warrior” which would basically contradict Lucas‘s original plan; I have no problem with Maul being above Vader but that would also mean Vader is above Yoda because he killed him in the Infinities comic and it would also mean Luke wasn’t even a proper warrior. The point is the author intent doesn’t get you anywhere.

When we said "intent" we were clearly referring to Lucasfilm's intent, not Ron Marz' intent. And Vader cutting off Yoda's arm in the Infinities comic means very little when you take into account that Vader was armed with a lightsaber, whereas Yoda was armed with a wooden stick.

Still an intent contradicted by basic feats of Vader’s and Maul’s. And the most powerful Jedi of all time doesn’t need a lightsaber to fight someone who is only Darth Maul level, he could just use the Force (which he did yet Vader powered through that).

ESB Yoda is weaker than ROTS Yoda lol.

@AlakanSpacewalker

Still an intent contradicted by basic feats of Vader’s and Maul’s.

Not really because a a stick wielding ESB Yoda has no duelling feats that make him impressive.

And the most powerful Jedi of all time doesn’t need a lightsaber to fight someone who is only Darth Maul level

He did fight Vader... With a stick. But he lost, Vader's ability to overcome a wooden stick wielding ESB Yoda doesn't reflect on Vader's ability to overcome a lightsaber wielding ESB Yoda.

he could just use the Force (which he did yet Vader powered through that).

Vader powered through that because the pain of the experience served to enrage him, and Yoda was completely taken by surprise by Vader's rage:




It's a common theme that pain increases the rage in Dark Sides in the SW mythos, and you ignored the fact that when Vader cut off Yoda's arm, Yoda visibly raised his stick to defend himself, but wooden sticks are useless against lightsabers.

...Ok and now why is an N-Canon Infinities source being brought up?....People what the hell? Come on..

Zenwolf wrote:...Ok and now why is an N-Canon Infinities source being brought up?....People what the hell? Come on..

That's their "Rebuttal" to resurrection, I'd presume.

Using Vader vs a stick wielding ESB Yoda to discredit Resurrection is committing a false equivalency.

IG wrote:

Zenwolf wrote:...Ok and now why is an N-Canon Infinities source being brought up?....People what the hell? Come on..

That's their "Rebuttal" to resurrection, I'd presume.

It’s called using your own argument against you, also the Yoda one was the only one you seemed to have a rebuttal for.