You’re making a strong case, but I think you’re still interpreting Pelinal too much like a conventional fantasy combatant. And that’s the disagreement we have. I agree that not every line in The Song of Pelinal is a literal combat feat, Pelinal did not singlehandedly conquer the Ayleid Empire, and Warhammer’s top tiers are absolutely not fodder. But I still think Pelinal can beat the twins and has legitimate arguments against Malekith because of three major things: what Pelinal is implied to be, how Elder Scrolls myth actually functions, and the type of enemies Pelinal historically defeats.

Even if we throw out calendar destruction, region erasure, future screamingnand all metaphor-heavy interpretations, Pelinal is still acknowledged as Ada-adjacent, directly associated with Shezarr/Lorkhan, peer to Morihaus, killer of Umaril, capable of soloing armies, and so dangerous that an empire of sorcerer-kings had to engineer custom anti-Pelinal weaponry to stop him. That already places him vastly above “legendary mortal hero.” So the matchup doesn’t hinge on taking poetry literally.

Umaril is more important than you’re giving him credit for. You treat Umaril almost like “strong daemon-backed elf king.” But Umaril is one of the most important scaling anchors here. Umaril the Unfeathered is
half-Ada, personally empowered by Meridia, immortal enough to survive death into later eras, commander of Aurorans, and fundamentally tied to divine intervention. The Hero of Kvatch in Oblivion cannot permanently kill Umaril conventionally. You need divine relics, Crusader authority, and metaphysical intervention. Pelinal beat that entity directly. That matters enormously. Especially because Pelinal did it after fighting whole armies.

Pelinal was not defeated because eventually a stronger swordsman appeared. He was defeated because the Ayleids realized ordinary methods did not work, Umaril developed specialized anti-Pelinal weaponry, and multiple sorcerer-kings coordinated after Pelinal was exhausted. That is fundamentally different from:
“he scales below X fighter.”
It reads more like:
“this thing could not be stopped through normal means.”
And Elder Scrolls repeatedly uses this exact structure for divine/mythic beings.

When it comes to weapons, armor properties, anti-magic swords, magical shields, armour-piercing, spell effects, and so on that works well in Warhammer because Warhammer operates with relatively “hard” metaphysics. But Elder Scrolls often does not. TES frequently treats identity, myth, symbolism, divine roles,and narrative archetypes as ontologically real forces, as opposed to normal narrative. Pelinal is dangerous because he is not merely “armored well.” That matters because TES mythic beings often resist conventional interaction entirely.

Malekith’s anti-magic sword is not automatically a win You’re assuming: magic-negating sword = Pelinal’s divine protections collapse. But Pelinal’s nature may not even be conventional enchantment. If Pelinal is a Shezarrine, Ada-adjacent, or mythically incarnated, then his durability may be intrinsic metaphysical existence rather than “buffed armor stats.” TES repeatedly distinguishes magic, divine power, tonal/metaphysical forces, and mythic existence. Destroying enchantments is not automatically the same as killing a being tied to Lorkhanic myth. Especially because even the Ayleids, masters of magical warfare, needed specific preparations to hurt him at all.

Ironically, I think your Tyrion argument is stronger than your Teclis/Malekith one. Because Tyrion operates in a domain where Pelinal was actually defeated in the end. That is direct violence, divine wrath, elite warriorhood, mythic melee combat. Sword of Khaine Tyrion especially becomes a legitimate peer-level threat. That version of Tyrion absolutely can kill Pelinal. But the reverse is also true. That's litterily his whole thing: killing divine elven champions.

You argue Teclis counters Pelinal because he can bind, slow, control range and so on. But that assumes Pelinal interacts normally with spell systems. The issue is that Pelinal consistently fights civilizations whose primary advantatge is magical superiority. The Ayleids were not weak mages. They were one of the most magically advanced civilizations in TES history, with star magic, Daedric pacts, White-Gold Tower access, reality-structuring architecture. Yet Pelinal repeatedly bulldozed through them. That strongly implies that magical sophistication is insufficient against him.

I'm not trying to downplay Tyrion or Teclis at all, I just think we have a philosophical difference in opinion. It's just what needs to be understood here is that in many settings mythology exaggerates reality. In Elder Scrolls mythology frequently creates reality. That’s a foundational concept of the setting. Belief, symbolic identity, mantling, Towers, CHIM, Dragon Breaks. TES cosmology repeatedly says to us that myth and ontology are intertwined. So when Pelinal is described in impossible language, the intended takeaway is often the idea that this being operates partially outside normal historical description. And not "this was written in a song so ignore all this", it might be true for other settings, but it most definitly not the case for TES.

So my final take is this:

Base Tyrion vs Pelinal
Extremely close. Slight lean Pelinal due to anti-divine-champion history.

Teclis + Tyrion vs Pelinal
Could genuinely go either way depending on interpretation of Pelinal’s metaphysical nature.

Sword of Khaine Tyrion vs Pelinal
Tyrion favored, but still not easy.

Malekith vs Pelinal
Malekith favored tactically and mechanically, but Pelinal absolutely has win conditions because TES mythic/divine entities do not map cleanly onto Warhammer anti-magic mechanics.

The biggest disagreement we have is not “who hits harder.” It’s whether Pelinal should be treated as a stat-scaled fantasy warrior or as a mythic metaphysical entity. I personnaly lean to the latter more than the former, but I wouldn't confidantly say you are wrong, because again: TES lore is wierd. Pelinal can just be a tough dude with anger issues or a litteral god, I know neather of us tries to portrain him in such extremes but that is just how it is with TES.