In Star Wars: Tales #1 (published by Dark Horse comics), there's a force sensitive astromech. How was it able to posses midi-chlorians, which were impossible to implant even in living creatures?

Who created Skippy? Was the mystery of the Force deciphered scientifically to create Droid Midi-chlorians? Or, was there a force-sensitive tiny creature living inside an Astromech shell (like a Dalek)?

P.S. I know that the comics in question isn't included in the new Disney canon. So, I am asking for old canon.

  • 1
    Star Wars Tales Volumes 1-5 aren't part of old canon either.
    – KSmarts
    Jan 23, 2015 at 17:48
  • 1
    Also not cannon: There is reference to tiny silicon based crystals that were sentient and had force sensitive members that lived inside droid bodies to interact with thier environment. They even had jedi for a bit starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Shard So maybe skippy had one of them inside him or maybe a force sensitive Zilkin starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Zilkin
    – Firebat
    Jan 23, 2015 at 18:01

1 Answer 1


This is explicitly explained in the comic. His lubricants have been contaminated with something called Midi-chloroxians, presumably an inorganic version of midi-chlorians.

Coupled with his extreme personal necessity (during a chance encounter with Jabba), it appears that he became able to access the Force.

enter image description here

enter image description here

  • 2
    Someone came up with something even cheesier than Midi-Chlorians...
    – Firebat
    Jan 23, 2015 at 21:32
  • 15
    @S.Fruggiero - I actually quite like this story. Although it's clearly a load of rubbish, it does at least have the charm of being clever, taking an existing (minor) character and giving them an utterly insane back-story.
    – Valorum
    Jan 23, 2015 at 21:48
  • 2
    It gives the feel of intentionally being comedic, like the author knew there would be a slight groan or inner chuckle at Midi-Chloroxians.
    – Firebat
    Jan 23, 2015 at 21:51
  • @Richard Skippy is even better than Figwit!
    – KSmarts
    Jan 23, 2015 at 22:53
  • @S.Fruggiero - it was definitely intentional.
    – Omegacron
    Jan 24, 2015 at 1:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.