This is the talk page for the article "Asajj Ventress/Legends."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit the Knowledge Bank. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

This talk page has archives.
1· 2


"This point forward, we are entering uncharted territory."

Asajj Ventress/Legends is within the scope of WookieeProject: The Clone Wars, an effort to develop comprehensive and detailed articles with topics originating in or related to the Star Wars: The Clone Wars television series.
If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice or visit our project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.


This article was showcased on Wookieepedia's Main Page from September 3 to September 10, 2006.


Asajj Ventress/Legends is a former Featured article. Please see this article's entry on the Inquisitorius page for the reasons it was removed.

Article milestones
Date Process Result
12 June 2006 User was too lazy to specify status Success
21 June 2006 Featured article
30 March 2007 Featured article review Removed
8 April 2007 Former Featured article
Current status: Former Featured article


According to the Star Wars database, they don't list her species at all, but rather her homeworld. With the new episode and all (seeing at one point she had some hair), does this change things? Korsa3 07:19, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

    • Seeing that she has hair does not mean she is not Rattataki. Because she was born on Dathomir does not rule out the possibility for her to be Rattataki. We should wait until this is confirmed.
      • This from the official "Star Wars" site does say that she is a Dathomiri from Dathomir. But from what I gather a Dathomiri is not strictly a species, more of a culture of Force sensitive witches, a Rattatki could be part of this culture I guess; how ever Ventress did visably have hair, something that Rattatki don't have. Alexsau1991 (talk page) StupidSithEmblem-Traced-TORkit 01:41, January 9, 2011 (UTC)

Nightsister template

Since it's revealed that she is a Nightsister, I think would be a good call to change her template. After all she's now more than a Dark Jedi and her affiliation is more specified... --Nekosama 17:36, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

Adoptive family and master

It's not impossible to keep the two Rattatak backgrounds of Ventress : perhaps her adoptive parent took Hal'Sted under their service after a battle on Rattatak (they're warlords, after all), and adopted the young girl...some years later, the parents were killed, Hal'Sted retrieve the young girl (she can be under his tutelage, as a student, even if he was adopted by the warlords)then fled, but was then killed by the pirates.

The rest of the story is already consistent. --Le Passant 10:36, January 9, 2011

  • I agree that its not impossible—I would be very much pleased if it was established that after Hal'Sted's death the two Rattataki warlords took Asajj in as an adoptive daughter, and then have to story continue as previously established from there. Or even if Hal'sted was working for the two, who treated Asajj as more of a daughter than a slave. But regardless, we can't make these assumptions ourselves, and can't mesh the stories ourselves—we can only work with what is presented to us explicitly. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 09:56, January 9, 2011 (UTC)
  • I admit that I never truly understand how the Wookiepedia works, how things are decided as editable or not. But if we assume that this battle of Sullust IS the "death of Ventress" from Obsession (and I'm an ardent defenseur of that theory), isn't it possible to assume this ? Please note that I just want to understand how it work. That's how I see the thing :

1) Hal'Sted took Ventress from Dathomir to Rattatak. 2) For an unknown reason, Ventress is adopted by the warlords (Hal'Sted can be at their service, or loosing a battle against them, etc). 3) The adoptive parents of Ventress are killed. 4) Hal'Sted retrieve the girl (either he was at the warlords service or just wanted to retrieve his slave). 5) Hal'Sted is killed by the Weequay pirates, then Ventress is found by Ki Narec.

You didn't have to modify or change anything in what have been said explicitely in the comics or the episode, since both sources are vague enough (some illustrations, some very short clip without explanation) to be mixed together. The only problem with this is the portrayal of Ventress in each scenes, but since it was, in the comics, a story by a local Warlord, you can naturally assume that he project his own image of Ventress in his story. Well, let's be patient and see, but I hope that an official thing will be said on this very easy thing. This is not even a retconn. Le Passant 10:23, January 9, 2011 (UTC)


I know she's Dathomiri now, but should we still metnion Rattatakki as a cover, citizenship, or cultural (like Bimms )? --The Great and Grand Count Mall!(Bow down before me!) 04:27, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

what the?

i was looking in the "disappearance" section of the article, and i noticed that someone changed it from, "anakin thought he had killed ventress on coruscant, and said kenobi wasn't thinking clearly", to, "Skywalker was convinced that they had seen Ventress killed on Sullust, and that Kenobi was not thinking clearly". i personally think that it is a good connection with the episode from the clone wars, (even though dooku had already turned on her, so it would not work) but did someone just assume this, or is there a source for it? Ralphjedimaster 04:52, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

It just looks like someone formalized the language. The meaning of the changed phrase is still identical to the original, just more formal and professional. I don't know about the Sullust/Coruscant thing, though. 17:41, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

Asajj - Vader what the hell?

In the article, it is noted that she "pushed" Anakin into turning into Darth Vader. How come? [[[User:XaviCommander]]]

In the Clone Wars cartoon series (not the computer animated one), when Anakin supposedly kills Ventress, he does so in anger, suggesting that he slipped into the dark side to do so. I wouldn't say that actually pushed him into becoming Vader, but it certainly was a step on the path. Livingston 05:09, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Minor Editing Changes

There are some minor changes that need to be made. Such as in the Personality changes, also in the article they say the Rattataki (Asajj Ventress) could we change it to Dathomirian? I don't think I am authorized to edit the mistakes. Therefore I thought I would just let people know.--Jackson31195 22:11, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

Flashback pic

Can we replace the current pic with he comic book illustration instead? and place the new one in the Nightsisters inconsistency section? Because the current one is crappy looking. But the comic one pretty much makes sense (Yet it shows her caring for her dying master which pretty makes up for her personality during her childhood)-Boba fett 32 01:50, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

  • I agree with this. Not due to the image quality, but because of the contradiction. JangFett (Talk) 01:56, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

I also agree. It sweems wrong to suddenly throw away a picture that worked so well just for the sake of some TV series that sort've messed up her whole story. I for one am sticking to the comic book version. Unsigned comment by (talk • contribs).


Shouldn't her species and home world be Rattatak, and her foster home be Dathomir like the nightbrothers are Zabrak from Iridonia, just as some Zabrak males are taken too Dathomir when young to become nightbrothers, wouldn't some Rattatak females also be taken there to become nightsisters --Kingofall42 19:14, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry mate. But it is officially Rectumed to be Dathomiri thanks to a certain individual who does not give a crud about EU.-Boba fett 32 04:28, February 17, 2011 (UTC)

2.3 Expansion for Other Abilities

Don't you think that she has clearly showed herself to be skilled in unarmed combat. I think we should add it to the other abilities section. Also could we get more pictures from her recent appearances from The Clone Wars. I would but I am not sure on how to do that at the moment. If anybody responds that would be great, so I would just know that someone is listening to me.--Jackson31195 21:40, February 22, 2011 (UTC)


In the Affiliation bar it is said that Asajj is a member of the order of the sith. Is that true? I don't know any evidence of this. On the order of the sith members bar there is so sign of her, just all Darth/Sith in the rise of republic era.

Tell me if i'm wrong, because I don't knew. Unsigned comment by Yezper (talk • contribs).

  • She reported directly to Count Dooku, and was a Sith acolyte (if not an actual Sith Lord), so I think it makes sense to list her as affiliated. —Milo Fett[Comlink] 22:48, April 27, 2011 (UTC)


Not to sound rude but I hope whenever more info is released people fix this because with the Clone wars show (2008), the comic books and the old clone wars show info getting all jumbled up her page is a HOT MESS! And nothing here is consistent 18:21, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

Powers and Abilites

Do we think it is fair to say that she has now only a slight disadvantage with not having a second blade. I mean come on she is did use some unarmed combat along side with it.--Jackson31195 18:10, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

  • Yes, it is appropriate to say that she has a disadvantage. Even though she was trained at unarmed, when it comes to lightsaber fights she clearly does better at Jar'Kai than at simple Makashi or Shii-Cho, depending on what you believe she used in the fight at the end of Season 4. Compare her difficulty in that fight with how well she stands up to Grievous in the Dathomir fight, or even against Anakin and Obi-Wan. True, she loses both, but the first is because the droids distract her, and the second because she is hurt/shaken already and the entire ship is under fire. So, yes, it is fair to say she's at a disadvantage when single-wielding. Cheers, Milar Kayne 10:48, 21 February 2013 (CST)


Isn't she still technically a Nightsister? Isn't that her ultimate loyalty? Should that be the infobox? --The Lampshade... (talk) 14:41, April 28, 2012 (UTC)Lamp774

  • That's an interesting question. Her latest chronological appearance in Star Wars Obsession shows that she had abandoned everything and went into hiding. So I'm not sure which infobox that merits. Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 14:54, April 28, 2012 (UTC)
    • Let's leave it as is until she is featured again in TCW. --The Lampshade... (talk) 20:12, May 20, 2012 (UTC)Lamp774
      • I really protest against the nightsister infobox. In the end as we know it she was a Separatist, a Dark Jedi in service of Dooku until the battle of Boz Pity.--Lars Oebeles 12:51, June 9, 2012 (UTC)


I do not think that she really trained Savage Opress an apprentice, as he was her tool and nothing else. It needs to be changed. 06:54, October 16, 2012 (UTC)

Main image

I don't know if anyone else agrees but should the main image be changed to one from TCW. Eventually we'll get to a point were more people look her up for TCW rather than the comics and it's likely that her Obsession ending will get overidden anyway. Commander Code-8 To say hi, press 42 06:39, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

  • Daa pictcha thawt du mocky chalia. I, for one, like the current picture where it is. It has near-photorealistic qualities, which is always a plus. Furthemore, I don't think we need to concede everything to The Clone Wars... --LelalMekha (talk) 13:33, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
I think we should use one from the Clone Wars, considering that it is now abundantly clear that her original fate in the comics has now been overridden. --20px - Cyrannian - Something Wicked This Way Comes... 22:06, January 12, 2013 (UTC)


I don't believe the entirety of Star Wars: Obsession should have been moved to the Behind the Scenes section, especially because Leland Chee specifically says we should "try to salvage what we can." (see ref note 46)

"We treat just the parts related to the death and anything involving Asajj's fate as no longer canon. The broad strokes of what happens with Durge and a conflict happening on Boz Pity still apply. The series always trumps what happens in the EU, but we try to salvage what we can."

Durge's article, and others, keep most of Obsession as canon. Really, the only part of this article that contradicts The Clone Wars canon is this sentence fragment: Ventress "ordered the pilots to alter their course; to take her as far away as possible from the war, Dooku, and the Jedi. The pilots complied." The rest of the section should be restored to the main article. She still fought at the Battle of Boz Pity, as Chee said. Thoughts from more experienced editors? --Rpmdkc (talk) 20:28, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

  • I agree. It should be restored. Rokkur Shen (talk) 22:07, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
    • How, exactly, does they conflict, anyway? Boz Pity was 20 BBY, after everything in TCW. There's nothing (except Chee, and I'm not saying what he says isn't law) that she didn't rejoin the Separatists for whatever reason and fight in Boz Pity yet. If the Battle of Xagobah gets to be in there, Boz Pity should as well. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 23:21, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
      • I re-read Obsession... there are conflicts, and I'm not sure where to place it if I do restore some of it. The entire motive for the Battle of Boz Pity is that no one has seen Ventress since she gave Anakin his scar, but it's also supposed to lead somewhat directly into Episode III. You create problems if you place Obsession before OR after the TV show. If you place Obsession before the Battle of Christophsis, you assume Ventress quickly returned to Dooku after he betrayed and left her for dead on Boz Pity. (Anakin is also very close to the dark side in this story, much closer than the show). If you place Obsession after the TV show (and Xagobah), it provides a conclusion to Ventress' story and explains why she's not in Episode III, but ruins the entire purpose of the story: the Republic thinking she's dead and Obi-Wan searching for her. I'd like to place it before Christophsis, and just leave the conclusion of the battle and her betrayal in Behind the Scenes, but every other page has Boz Pity after the TV show. I guess I'll leave it alone for now and we'll deal with it after the TV show wraps. Anyone else is welcome to chime in.Rpmdkc (talk) 10:51, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
        • Well, fact is that no one in Obsession ever said that the "fall from the roof of Coruscant" after the duel with Anakin is actually the same where she recieved the scar. It's alluded, and it is certainly intended, but nothing that could not be retconnable in a simple manner.--Le Passant (talk) 11:30, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
          • We're all definitely going to have to wait until the Clone Wars is over. Chee makes another statement, we have no further information to go on. Dave Filoni has shown that he has no regard for the work of other Star Wars writers, and Obsession is taking the brunt of his rewriting of canon. We still have no explanation of the late appearances of Adi Gallia nor Even Piell, so, like their histories, Ventress's will have to wait for awhile too.--Demos Traxen (talk) 16:32, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

The last preview for "The Wrong Jedi" lead us to a fight between Anakin and Ventress...on Coruscant. This COULD be a nice retcon for Obsession. After all, IF Ventress is beaten here, there is absolutely NO reason for the Ventress storyline of Obsession to be discarded--Le Passant (talk) 08:12, February 28, 2013 (UTC)

I believe with the TV show officially over [just "bonus content" s6 now and some confirmation that no Characters fates will be revealed] that we restore part of the obsession post for ventress..if i have permission I would be willing to include everything up to her ultimate fate [the whole going into exile] if anyone here has any objections please say so but i feel with this confirmation we put it back in --Bridgeboy95 (talk) 03:46, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

To the best of my ability I have edited the article to include the Asajj Information without giving away her ultimate fate the "appeared to die" was their to help solidify this the entire shuttle section has been deleted out of it as agreed above I have also put in "apparent" besides corpse to keep vagueness. any mention of the duel on courscant has been removed as well for now this is the best we will have timeline wise i put this as the latest..if any other editors would like to improve on this please feel free to --Bridgeboy95 (talk) 03:59, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+