Talk:Darth Traya

See also Talk:Kreia/Archive.

Mysterious Past
Or it could be suggested that she did not find Malachor until well after Revan's departure; otherwise she likely would have accompanied him in his search for the "True" Sith.

Why?

According to the in-game dialog - which supercede the Chronicles whenever the two overlap- Revan did not go back to Malachor V after the Jedi Civil War. He remembered what he had found on Malachor when he first visited and then went off to battle the Ancient/True Sith.

And if I'm mistaken, even if Revan *did* go back to Malachor V, KotOR 2 could imply that she *did* briefly accompany Revan. She begins the game in the Ebon Hawk if you recall. Indeed, she could very well have been travelling with Revan, only for him to dump her (and the droids) and continue on his way alone as he had always intended. She then starts hunting for the Exile while in the Hawk, which leads us to the start of KotOR II... personally, I don't think that. I think she followed the footsteps of Revan and *found* the Ebon Hawk, and then used it to find the Exile...

Regardless, in EITHER case, the "Guardian of Malachor V", or, if you prefer, "The Headmistress of the Trayus Academy" suggestion seems perfectly valid to me.

Whilst the following has *no place* in the article, since it is pure, unadulterated speculation, given what is actually revealed in the game, these are the conclusions I came to:


 * Kreia (or Kae, if you want to think like that) was exiled from the Order after Revan led his breakaway faction of the Jedi to war. The (majority of the) council blamed her teachings for Revan's "fall". Obviously Revan hadn't truly fallen at this point, but he'd certainly gone against their judgement and undermined their authority, which to them was probably bad enough
 * Kreia joins the battle against the Mandalorians. If she's Kae, then Yusanis accompanies her, and they get frisky and whatnot.
 * At some point during the war Revan uncovers Malachor V and starts delving into its hidden Sith teachings. (He may have even found it before he joined the wars, and been a 'secret Sith Lord' in hiding, ala Sidious, all along, but it's not necessary for him to have been so)
 * After the destruction of the mandalorians at Malachor, when the "Sith teachings start sweeping through the ranks", Revan designates Kreia (or Darth Traya as she might be going by now) as the person in charge of the Trayus Academy at Malachor, and the trainer of his Sith assassins. As far as anyone else knows however, she died in the wars. (Especially if she's Kae, since Yusanis is still alive and would not expect her to abandon him, so he'll be reporting that she died. Probably.)
 * Revan does *not* tell Malak about the Trayus Academy on Malachor. He instructs him in the ways of the Sith, but does not tell him from where the knowledge came. Probably one of the things that pisses him off the most.
 * Revan and Malak find the Star Forge and return as Sith Lords.
 * Kreia is probably training Nihilus throughout all this time.
 * Throughout the war, when Revan needs people assassinated etc - he'd get in contact with the academy at Malachor, and they'd send people out to do the job
 * Revan is betrayed by Malak. Since Malak knows nothing of the Academy on Malachor, he never calls upon their services. Kreia probably figures out what's happened, either through the Force or some other means.
 * Kreia's loyal to Revan, not Malak, she doesn't reveal her presence or that of the Academy to him. She continues training Nihilus.
 * Revan returns and beats Malak. Whether he goes dark or light (officially light), there is eventually a civil war on Korriban, from which Sion flees.
 * Sion learns of the Trayus Academy and travels there. Trains under Darth Traya etc.
 * Sion and Nilhilus eventually cast Traya down... and the rest is history.

There are probably a few flaws in the above but it has been a while since I sifted through all the dialog files.

It doesn't matter anyway, I'm sure the above will be made obsolete by some official comic or sourcebook or something... which'll just introduce a whole new bunch of continuity flubbs.(Ulicus 13:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)) -
 * "According to the in-game dialog - which supercede the Chronicles whenever the two overlap- Revan did not go back to Malachor V after the Jedi Civil War." He did. Kreia mentions that in the end. Revan came to Malachor, left the Ebon Hawk there and only then departed to the Unknown Regions. (And by the way, why shouldn't Malak know about the Trayus Academy? He fought at Malachor V, right? - Sikon [ Talk ] 17:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC))
 * Yeah, checked, you're right - Revan goes go back to Malachor V. *Shrug* Maybe he just avoided Kreia. I just can't accept that she was exiled after the Jedi Civil War, since Kavar says she 'died' in the Mandalorian Wars. I still think it's likely she was a Sith throughout the JCW, even if she wasn't stationed on Malachor or known as Darth Traya at the time.


 * As for Malak... well, since he survived without becoming some sort of 'hole' or 'wound' or what-have-you, and since at that time he was pretty loyal to Revan, I'm under the impression that whilst he fought *at* Malachor V, he didn't fight *on* Malachor V.


 * And since we're told that Malak *does not know* about the threat of the True Sith in KotOR II (or at least, that's heavily implied) I find it difficult to believe he knows about the Trayus Academy - or even where Revan truly got the Sith teachings from. Since otherwise you'd think he'd *also* know about the True Sith. (Ulicus 02:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC))

--Sentry [ Talk ] 08:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Since there is a lot of confusion about Kreia's origins, I'm posting relevant portions of the Chronicles here for reference. Much of it is backed up by in-game dialog, but not all... - Copyright LucasArts.

Dark Lord, again
"The three lords of KotORII are never called Dark Lords"
 * Since Freedon Nadd is in the Dark Lord sucession box, shouldn't Traya be there too? At least with a "de facto" comment? None of them have actually claimed the title in any material, but they were the leading Sith Lords of their time and nobody disputed Traya's (and later Nihilus'/Sion's) rule over the remaining Sith forces. Charlii 08:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Whatever anyone else called them, they were the ones running the showSithPower 10:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * No other thoughts on the matter? Adding... Charlii 07:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well THANK YOU for reverting without comment. Charlii 11:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * As far as I know (I havent played KOTOR2 yet, so I dont really have much to say in this), Freedon Nadd rightfully claim the rank of Dark Lord by murdering the last Dark Lord, Naga Sadow. After Nadd died, Marka Ragnos personally promote Kun to Dark Lord of the Sith. After Kun died, Revan and Malak worked it out and Revan became the new Dark Lord, and Malak claimed the title by killing (so he thought) Revan. From what I heard, neither one of the three bad guys in KOTOR2 claimed the title of Dark Lord, and no other canonical reference states any of them as Dark Lord. Darth Kevinmhk 12:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Nadd has never claimed the title, actually the old TotJ Companion says that he wasn't strong enough to be a Sith Lord and therefore settled on Onderon. This is in line with his presentation in the comics. The three lords of KotoRII are never called Dark Lord(s), but on the other hand we have no "Darth" (well, before Legacy...) that wasn't a DL or directly apprenticed to one. Anyway. I purpose that Traya is added to the sucession box with a "de facto" comment for the purpose of continuity. She did control the Sith remnant, and this sucession box is most of all about the Sith heritage. That's why it leads to Xendor and Flint, even though none of them were real Sith. Charlii 14:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, they are, Kreia states of Nihilus:

"He is one of the Dark Lords that follows you"

The KotoR games, both I and II, use "Sith Lord" and "Dark Lord" pretty interchangably. It's irritating.(195.92.168.167 14:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC))
 * Oh, well... If they really are called Dark Lords, I guess it's really not much to debate? Unless anybody have a quote from KotoRII where Dark Lord is used in the wrong context by Kreia or another of the Lords (who all should know the difference). Charlii 14:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * What about a box that says "Leader of The Sith"?SithPower 15:47, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * If there are many people against Dark Lord so, sure. Charlii 16:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * For "One of the Dark Lords" quote: in Sith history, only the New Sith Empire has multiple (i mean many) Dark Lords, and the Order of the Sith Lords with 2 Dark Lords (while Master is the leader). Thus, Jedi Civil War era's Dark Lords should consider as merely Sith Lord, the Dark term was just a figure of speech. Look at KOTOR comic issue 5, I see no proof that the red armor guy is a Sith, let alone a Dark Lord as they claimed. For Nadd, well I guess NEC's retcon outrank the original comic now as NEC recently define how Nadd kills Sadow (The Jedi didnt even know Nadd had killed Sadow in the comic, and no one attempted to stop Nadd and his dark side descendents for 350 years. Thus what the Jedi claimed in the comic should not be considered as absolute facts). As I mentioned I duno KOTOR2 much, so I will leave that part for someone else to argue. Darth Kevinmhk 16:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * About Nadd: Nobody calls ObiWan a Dark Lord just because he killed Maul. The NEC doesn't change anything about Nadd's character, it only adds the fact that he killed Sadow (probably not a great feat, the guy was over six hundred years old). And about Dark Lords: Titles and their meaning change over time. Sion and Nihilus seemed rather equal i the game, neither one the master over the other. If they decided to share the title Dark Lord and rule the Sith together, who would have stopped them? Charlii 16:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I'll add the leader succession boxes. If you have any objections please put them on the Talk page before reverting, please.SithPower 22:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Changed the content so that it will less possibly be reverted by others. Darth Kevinmhk 03:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Good ideaSithPower 01:41, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Factfiles calls Nadd a Dark Lord. Nothing says that Traya, Nihilus, and Sion ever were.

-User:Mikda Fopal
 * It is interesting to note about Freedon Nadd here in reference to the above comment that Freedon Nadd wasn't strong enough to become a Sith Lord and therefore settled on Onderon; the Mandalorean guide for the Exile's comapions exploring his tomb was something akin to: "He (Nadd) was far worse than Revan or Malak ever were."

Lord of Betrayal?

 * I remember Star Wars: The Ultimate Visual Guide stating Sion as Lord of Pain and Nihilus as Lord of Hunger, but I dont remember whether it stated Kreia/Traya as Lord of Betrayal or not, can anyone confirm for me? Thanks. Darth Kevinmhk 04:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * This is said in the actual game itself; one of the loading screen messages for Malachor V says that Sion learned Pain, Nihilus learned Hunger, and Traya learned Betrayal. Amazing how much has to be learned from those loading screens, when content gets cut. :-) -BaronGrackle 13:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, but is she directly called the "Lord of Betrayal"? The fact that she learned to use it is established in the first quote, but the question here is if we should say that Lord of Betrayal was one of the titles that she actually used. Charlii 13:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly my point, especially when other wookieepedians seem to call her Lady... Officially she is Lady or Lord? Darth Kevinmhk 14:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It was a long time since I played the game, but I don't think she's called Lord/Lady there. The only other source I have read (NEC) called her a Lord, but that was together with Nihilus and Sion, so the male pronome is correct. We know Lady can be a correct way to address a female Sith Lord, so I see no problem with using it here. Charlii 15:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

After Nihilus's death

 * Earlier we settle with Traya as leader of Triumvirate, then Nihilus as Dark Lord. So after the deaths of Sion and Nihilus while Traya being the final boss, do we need to give her 1 more succession box? As the only known major Sith of the time, does she automatically gain Dark Lord status? Just like Luke's succssion box has him as Grand Master since 4 ABY? Darth Kevinmhk 03:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * She never was one to care about titles, there was hardly anything left of the Sith Empire at the time, she only had this status for a few days at most and it's just messy with multiple succession boxes... Just as we have Naga Sadow -> Ludo Kressh -> Freedon Nadd, it is easier to read and quickly lets you navigate through the timeline. If you want the details you can find them in each article. Charlii 07:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I am under the assumption that Kreia/Darth Traya was in fact a true GREY JEDI, though her two incarnations of both Sith Lord and Jedi were extremes on both sides of the spectrum. She was far more a GREY JEDI than Jolee Bindo in this regard, I think.  In reference to the above post, Kreia didn't care for titles, as we know.  During KOTOR II when the Exile asks her what she is, Jedi or Sith, she claims that there is no need for titles and that she was once both, and held them for what they were. Mikda Fopal