Talk:Tulak Hord

Two lightsabres
The lightsaber article says that the lightsaber was invented circa 9900 BBY, long after this article claims Tulak lived. Which one is wrong? Is this a case of fanon? -- Silly Dan 02:52, 5 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * These Sith from the games seem to acquire much fanwanking. Be very wary. QuentinGeorge 06:16, 5 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * Kreia does say something about Tulak Hord during the Korriban levels of KOTOR 2 -- perhaps I'll check during my next playthrough if what she says resembles what the anons like to add to this article. I'm fairly sure she didn't say anything about twin lightsabers. -- Silly Dan  02:00, 14 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, nothing about twin blades, but she does go on about how good he was with lightsabers. When did the Sith develop lightsabers (or steal them from the Jedi?)  Before or after the Great Hyperspace War? Tulak Hord must have reigned shortly after that.  &mdash; Silly Dan  03:16, 31 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Succession Box

 * Who keeps doing this? Xendor can't succeed Tulak because Xendor was dead before the renegade Jedi conquered the Sith! QuentinGeorge 05:35, 14 Jul 2005 (UTC)

How did we get the information that Tyranus came close to his skill with the lightsaber? Quote, please.--Andrelvis 06:11, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems to be fanwanking. I removed it. QuentinGeorge 03:41, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

When did Hord live?

 * Looking at this article, I now feel that Hord must be post-Great Hyperspace War, since he was a lightsaber duelist, and the Ancient Sith didn't have the weapon until they contacted the Republic again post-Naga Sadow. Accordingly, I think he should be after Ludo Kressh in the succession line. QuentinGeorge 03:41, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Perhaps they had lightsabers and they just got lost in time. We're talking about 20.000 years here! After all, we might learn things about the ancient Sith and lightsabers with these "True Sith"... Until then, I think he should be neither Ancient nor post-Great Hyperspace War. He should be in "Others". --Master Starkeiller 16:18, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * No, I think it makes more sense that they copied the lightsaber from fallen Jedi during the Great Hyperspace War. I think the succession box should go back where it was.  &mdash; Silly Dan  20:00, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but we don't know for sure, right? --Master Starkeiller 20:01, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, we can infer from his lightsaber use that he was after any Sith lord who appeared in the Great Hyperspace War, and he was long enough before Darth Revan that his tomb was in ruins by the time he (or she) visited. I suppose he might have been after Freedon Nadd, but since Nadd's tomb was on Dxun rather than Korriban, it seems like Nadd ruled the Sith after Korriban was abandoned.  &mdash; Silly Dan  20:14, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * It's pretty clear from the game that the intent was for him to be an ancient Sith Empire Era Sith Lord. I even think Kreia says he was the greatest lightsaber master in the Sith Empire... But we assume from Tales of the Jedi that there were no lightsabers in the Sith Empire. That's why I think he fits into "Others", there is seemingly conflicting information. But if you think about it, the first Dark Lord of the Sith, the red-clad one, held a saber in his hand when the Sith race recognized him as a god... --Master Starkeiller 20:58, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * By Revan's time, Ludo Kressh would have been ancient. Even Freedon Nadd was centuries earlier.  I haven't actually read the ToTJ comics, so I won't revert your succession box edit (though I suspect placing Hord somewhere between Kressh and Nadd is correct.)  &mdash; Silly Dan  21:40, 15 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Sith Lightsabre
With regards to when Tulak Hord lived, is it possible that: Any thoughts? Jasca Ducato 17:56, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * A)Kreia was wrong about Tulak Hord
 * B)Kreia was correct about Tulak Hord but instead of stating the name of his true weapon, called him a Lightsabre master for the benefit of the Jedi Exile
 * C)That Tulak Hord was using an early Sith substitute for the Lightsabre, perhaps a Sith Tremor Sword infused with the power of the Force so much that it glowed, or an early version of a Lightsabre?
 * There's no reason Kreia would lie or make a mistake, and the Exile was probably familliar with Tremor Swords and the like, so Kreia would've said Tremor Sword if that's what Tulak Hord used. On the other hand, there's a very good chance the game's writers forgot when the Sith first gained access to lightsabers (and I'm pretty sure that was after contact with the Jedi).  &mdash; Silly Dan  21:40, 15 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * KOTOR and KOTOR 2 took a few liberties on Galactic History. This is just one of those thing's that Leland Chee or someone at Lucasfilm will have to fix. -- SFH 21:56, 15 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, here is the opening page from Golden Age of the Sith.
 * Well, they look like lightsabres to me. Which would mean (a) whatever source said lightsabres were developed in 9900 BBY or so may be wrong, and (b) Tulak's weapon wouldn't help us figure out when he lived.  &mdash; Silly Dan  21:50, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Those could also be Energy swords. -- SFH 22:18, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm not totally certain that they are lightsabres. It should be noted that if indeed they are, this is the last time in the story you see Sith wielding them - which still leads to the problem of why a Golden Age Sith Tulak Hord is running around wielding a lightsaber. QuentinGeorge 22:32, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Here's another pic of "Red" Dark Lord.
 * Certainly the thing on his belt looks very lightsaberish...we could, however, be seeing an error that has started to propogate amongst newer material. QuentinGeorge 23:10, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I see definitive proof that lightsabers existed since 25.000 BBY. But since there can be other explanations, let's keep Tulak vague. --Master Starkeiller 10:30, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * A new twist! The New Essential Chronology restates the given lightsaber invention date of c. 10,000 BBY, BUT retcons the birth of the Sith to the Hundred-Year Darkness. So Tulak Hord is no problem now. QuentinGeorge 06:53, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * So Tulak Hord did have access to the Lightsabre. Then i suggest that someone changes his position on the Dark Lord page and modify the article accordingly. Jasca Ducato 14:16, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Of course it looks like a lightsaber, and probably that's what the artist was intending. But it could be something else. Perhaps some sort of collapsible Vibroblade? Heck, it might not even be a weapon--how about one of those electronic scrolls we saw a fair amount of in TOTJ?--Valin Kenobi 04:13, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The Red Sith
I decided to add this here since there is already info about him here. I have a question, why is he referred to as the First Dark Lord of the Sith? Nowhere in that article can it be inferred that the scene shown is of the first Dark Lord of the Sith. This guy could just as easily be Tulak Hord himself after conquering the likes of Ajunta Pall and Dathka Graush who used Sith swords rather than lightsabers.

I see that the Sith people seem to be bowing down to this God-King, but I don't see how that conveys the first contact of the Sith people with the exiled Dark Jedi.

The way I see it there are 3 possibilities.
 * 1)The Red Sith is the First Dark Lord of the Sith and he killed Ajunta Pall for the right to the title of the First Dark Lord of the Sith, since Ajunta was with the first group that found the Sith people.


 * 2)The Red Sith is not a Dark Lord of the Sith, but rather part of the first group to encounter the Sith people, making him a lord, but never Dark Lord of the Sith.

216.221.96.201 05:59, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * 3)The Red Sith is a later Dark Lord of the Sith, perhaps someone after Dathka Graush and around Tulak's time, perhaps he is Tulak himself.
 * I think if BioWare intended Tulak Hord to be the Red Sith, they would have stated it explicitly. - Sikon [ Talk ] 05:16, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * They disregarded the rest of the TotJ books when making the games anyway, could it not just be coincidence that they're the same person? And how exactly would they have said explicitly that the Red Sith is Tulak? On their website? That'd be a pretty awkward statement by Kreia, "Oh, and by the way, Tulak wore this dark red armor and he appeared in the TotJ books!"216.221.96.201 04:51, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Disregarded? A bold statement. Facts, please. - Sikon [ Talk ] 08:15, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)