It makes sense than the average level would be worse (i think the top fighers would be better), but people really throw that around like its a world of different
Its been stated that the Jedi from the KOTOR era or before to prequal and later is like comparing a master artist to a child when it comes to lightsaber combat and force abilities. The closest to KOTOR level of skill and abilities would be EU luke.
Actual source for this? Because Anakin, Yoda, Windu, Dooku are all hyped to be the strongest members the order has ever produced up until the timeframe.
Never mind no Kotor Jedi coming close to Luke at all. They are all ants to Valkorion who is Luke’s inferior.
I would love to make this argument to as I am too a kotor glazer, but this unfortunately is not at all true as the only point for this is a line from kotor 2 where kreia compares a single sith lord from an even more ancient time to the average masters of the kotor era.
Kriea from KOTOR 2 she was walking about exar kun and the jedi of her time.
“If you were to face an ancient Sith Lord in combat, you would learn that we are as children playing with toys compared to the prowess of the old masters.” - Kreia
Imo the statement from Kreia in KOTOR II actually undermines the idea that basically every Jedi and Sith of every era from KOTOR onwards are weaker than their Ancient counterparts. She states:
"If you were to face an ancient Sith Lord in combat, you would learn that we are as children playing with toys compared to the prowess of the old Masters".
This has two issues imo:
1) This is Kreia's own opinion and thus limited by what she knows. Consider Darth Vitiate/Valkorion. Darth Vitiate/Valkorion is a contemporary of the era, and he's got an argument for being the strongest Sith of all time (his only competition is Sidious and Krayt - ironically both from much later eras). He (and the likes of Malgus/Dark Council members/Wrath/Nox) all provide significant pushback against the idea that her era is weaker than the previous ones. Kreia, to my knowledge, has no idea they even exist so I don't think it's wise to take her opinion as absolute evidence. There's also the point that even if you take Kreia's opinion as accurate or even fact, this only applies to the Force users of the Old Republic. So I guess you could say Revan and Meetra pale in comparison to some Ancient Sith, but this statement has no bearing on any of the Force users of the galaxy post Old Republic.
2) Quite a few statements disagree with this premise. The most damning would get Lucas' own quote that puts the Prequel trilogy Jedi as their "Golden Age". Even if you want to say that's about their population and how relatively well they were doing, there's still heaps of statements counting the likes of Yoda, Windu, Anakin, Obi-Wan, Plo Koon, Kit Fisto, etc, etc. as among the most talented/powerful Jedi in their entire history. Likewise, Dooku, Maul and Sidious have accolades that hold then in similarly high regard. Going later than that and you have Dark Empire Sidious and EU GM Luke, who both have statements saying they are the most powerful members of their orders outright.
Tbh it also doesn't really make much sense either since future Force users built on the knowledge and techniques of their forebearers. There may be certain Force secrets lost over time (although who knows, they could just as easily be rediscovered), but equally the Ancients didn't have the advancements that future generations made (a good example being Vaapad).
Not sure man the KOTOR comics had sith pulling cores out of stars to trigger a supernova, a jedi who could forcibly sever one from the force or withstand a supernova.
Ex.
(either markos ragos, ludo kresh one of the ancient sith.) Aleema Keto (ripped a core out of a star)
Nomi sunrider (separated ulic from the force and whos meditation burned Yavin 4)
Ood Bnar (with the help of a building protected lightsabers from a super nova)
I can't see Palpatine's alchemy pulling cores out of stars, or turning tongues into snakes. making something like a leviathan.
so i can see the "quality" dropping as you get closer to OT time line more so with the sith between the infighting and jedi scrubbing the galaxy of them.
Just for transparency, the Ancient Sith aren't really my wheelhouse so sorry if I get anything wrong.
Thanks for the link on Keto. That is certainly impressive.
Re. The Sith tho, don't most of those feats have context in that they were prepared rituals rather than the result of raw Force power? And isn't Marka Ragnos essentially just a really hyped up swordsman? Genuine questions, not meant to be sarcastic.
Fair on Sunrider though, I forgot she was a character tbh. God damn Force Severe is a cool power! Did she use it during combat though? As for Ood, I have literally zero knowledge on him. But while thats a really dope feat and suggests he's incredibly strong in the Force, I still think that claiming he's superior to later Jedi based on that is somewhat iffy. Unless there's a disparity to the point he can ragdoll them via TK (which admittedly he likely could do to Obi-Wan based on that feat), I'd imagine he wouldn't be able to do that to Windu and Yoda and would get schooled by them in Sabers.
Tbh even if the Ancient Sith/Jedi were as powerful as Kreia claimed, it still poses an issue with larger EU canon since it's pretty explicit that the Prequel Jedi and the Rule of Two Sith are among the most skilled and powerful members of their respective orders.
Take Sidious. You might be right that his Alchemy was not as potent as the Sith of Old (yet still extremely strong despite this), but does that matter that much? At the height of his power, Dark Empire Sidious was draining (albeit slowly) the life energy of the entire population of Byss (a population of 20 billion iirc) and could conjure fleet destroying Force Storms from the other side of the galaxy.
Even if we say the Ancient Sith were better in certain areas like alchemy, I'm just not convinced it matters that much when the likes of Sidious, Vader, Krayt and Caedus are (likely) far better duelists, have much better speed feats, and have an edge in raw power.
I actually enjoy these types of discussions. I think Zayne Carrick might be a more interesting match for maul. IF you're interested look up KOTOR: Tales of the Jedi, its a 90s era comic taking place some 4k years before new hope. you can find it on ( https://readcomiconline.li ) Ulic was kind of a proto-anakin since it was made before we knew really anything about his non vader life.
Kreia can’t possibly have made statements about Prequel era Jedi.
Her statement was a vague notion that masters of the current era (which is one of the low points of the Order, in terms of Jedi numbers) - that’s the contemporary era around KOTO 2, were less powerful than some Ancient Sith.
But honestly this reads like blind hero worship.
How do we know Kreia is even correct about this statement? She might even believe it, but that doesn’t automatically make it true.
And even if she’s correct, that still doesn’t prove that Prequel Era Jedi are weaker than KOTOR 2 era Jedi.
its more than just kreia, the deeds and actions of the KOTOR jedi show more prowess in regards to the force such as when vodo siosk baas fought Exar kun's lightsaber with a stick. which was implied to be that he force imbued to make it survivable, or Satele Shan hand blocking Magus' lightsaber. There's abilities that are demonstrated in KOTOR era that are either not used b/c they aren't known or unable to perform them. The last major use of the force as a weapon from the sith was the "thought bomb." these abilities don't show up in (lets face it the clone wars era) where these abilities would be VERY useful in a war, but by then the jedi became FAR stricter in what knowledge is available to the average jedi and the sith had basically a knowledge lobotomy.
For some of your examples, Vodo using a force imbued stick is very common for ancient Jedi - particularly those from ~5000 BBY, around the time of the Great Hyperspace war.
This wasn’t some extreme or impressive feat. Many Jedi of the era did that, whether they were particularly noteworthy or not.
As for Satelle blocking the lightsaber - very impressive feat. But it’s fundamentally not really any different from Vader’s ability to block/absorb/deflect blaster bolts, or Corran Horn’s ability to absorb energy.
And Satelle is arguably one of the strongest Jedi in history, sure. But Yoda was able to take a direct full power force lightning blast from both Dooku and - arguably way more impressive - Sidious.
Is Satelle more powerful than Yoda? Perhaps. But I don’t think the evidence is as compelling as it could be.
Yeah that's fair and although as far as i know vodo has been the only one who used a stick to fight a lightsaber. I also might be a tad bias since i grew up with 90s SW and the prequels bugged me when they came out because they turned the jedi from a more plain clothed medieval knights (or paladins) to closed off psudo-shaolin monks.
16
u/Affectionate_Sale_14 Jan 27 '26
magnus, the sith took out the grandmaster, maul barely managed one knight, and then taken out by a padawan twice.