Is the traitor player!? CONTAINS SPOILERS

[Rubie31]

I just watched the Kingdom Hearts 2.8 Back Cover. Ira says the traitor is the one with the nightmare Chirithy. And in the original online game for KHX[Chi] they revealed who that Chirithy belongs to.

Spoiler Show

The nightmare Chirithy belongs to the player. Player actually has two of them, a light one and a dark one. And then when player is fighting Gula he says "so it's been you all along".

I didn't get all of this until 2.8 came out. Now it all makes sense. Knowing what the true goals of the Unions leaders were and what the masters of masters actually did makes it easier to understand. But I have no clue what this means.

 

[VoidGear.]

There's two problem with this.

1. Usually a person has only one Chirithy. But your normal, first Chirithy doesn't turn dark, so it's not exactly what the MoM said about giving in to the darkness.

2. We don't know which foreteller has the right idea of a "traitor" or if that even exists, because it was never specified.

 

[Rubie31]

True. But if there was a traitor, then wouldn't it be player. I'm not talking about a what if scenario that there wasn't a traitor. Plus, if the Nightmare Chirithy was born from the darkness in players heart then it could exist. Considering Sora and Riku could have a limitless supply of Dream Eaters then the player could have more than one.

Also, the Chirithy at the beginning is the one given to all keyblade wielders. SO maybe before the player got to Daybreak town, they already had one.

 

[Grono]

The problem with this is that it's well established that Ira has no idea what a traitor really is and that he's being foolish and making assumptions based on their current situation on what betrayal could mean. It's well established in Back Cover that each foreteller kind of has to interpret things as they go along to make their own decisions, but it's also well established that pretty much all of them don't really know how to approach the decision at hand nor do they have any base to go on in making their assumptions. In a way, almost every one of them could be considered "traitorous" to everyone else's cause (besides Ava, who was the only one to fulfill her goals correctly throughout the entire movie), yet none of them can be considered traitorous because none of them know what being a traitor entails or what one could actually do.

Ira assumes that the one filled with darkness that made the chirithy would be the "traitorous" one, but he clearly didn't think it through and he assumed it belonged to one of them, which is what sets everyone off to start to distrust one another. Sure, you could argue that The Master certainly didn't help to suppress the seeds of doubt throughout the foretellers, but if it wasn't for Ira, Invi, Gula, and, yes, even Aced, none of them would have viciously tried to scope out a traitor and reveal each other as an outlyer to their own cause. The only thing they do know about the traitor is that it's probably one of them, but even then they don't really know that. The Player could be considered the traitor in any respect, but the real answer probably is that a traitor never really existed, and, if The Master was truly nefarious, he planted the idea on purpose to throw everyone off and prevent the prevention of the war. I personally don't think The Master is a bad guy, but it's definitely true that he didn't help the situation by turning everyone suspicious of each other (except for Ava, who rocks).

 

[Sephiroth0812]

The problem with this is that it's well established that Ira has no idea what a traitor really is and that he's being foolish and making assumptions based on their current situation on what betrayal could mean. It's well established in Back Cover that each foreteller kind of has to interpret things as they go along to make their own decisions, but it's also well established that pretty much all of them don't really know how to approach the decision at hand nor do they have any base to go on in making their assumptions. In a way, almost every one of them could be considered "traitorous" to everyone else's cause (besides Ava, who was the only one to fulfill her goals correctly throughout the entire movie), yet none of them can be considered traitorous because none of them know what being a traitor entails or what one could actually do.

Ira assumes that the one filled with darkness that made the chirithy would be the "traitorous" one, but he clearly didn't think it through and he assumed it belonged to one of them, which is what sets everyone off to start to distrust one another. Sure, you could argue that The Master certainly didn't help to suppress the seeds of doubt throughout the foretellers, but if it wasn't for Ira, Invi, Gula, and, yes, even Aced, none of them would have viciously tried to scope out a traitor and reveal each other as an outlyer to their own cause. The only thing they do know about the traitor is that it's probably one of them, but even then they don't really know that. The Player could be considered the traitor in any respect, but the real answer probably is that a traitor never really existed, and, if The Master was truly nefarious, he planted the idea on purpose to throw everyone off and prevent the prevention of the war. I personally don't think The Master is a bad guy, but it's definitely true that he didn't help the situation by turning everyone suspicious of each other (except for Ava, who rocks).

All correct, in one of the later scenes of Back Cover Gula even admits and laments that the whole problem is very ambigious and even him having the Lost Page (which according to his assigned role and what the Master of Masters told him is supposed to help him unmask the traitor) is not really helping it because the Lost Page is also written very ambigiously and hard to understand.

It is also not confirmed that only one Dark Chirithy exists because the Master of Masters explicitly explained that each Chirithy has the potential to turn dark and even if one could pinpoint which Dark Chirithy was the first one, it would be close to impossible to find out to whom it belongs (as the Fortellers themselves realize and Invi calls Ira out more than once for just jumping to conclusions) nor would it automatically make that person a traitor by default.

As for Ava, she's certainly not completely blameless on the whole situation as well even if she isn't suspicious of the others, as she does escalate the tensions as well partly by inaction and indecisiveness and partly by very obviously taking sides with Gula.

 

[Rubie31]

I am referring to the both the "Back Cover" and the original online X[chi] game. I played it through before it ended last year after the launch of the app game. The Dark Chirithy clearly states it is your(the player's) Chirithy. There are also a lot of things mentioned. And Gula says "So it's been your all along".

 

[BlackOsprey]

Yeah, but... how exactly does having a Dark Chirithy make the player a traitor? Like the others have said, the whole "Dark Chirithy = traitor" thing was just Wild Mass Guessing on Ira's part.

And what "other things" are mentioned? Just having Gula say "so it's been you all along" without any context whatsoever isn't very compelling evidence.

 

[Foxycian]

question is the player canon to the story? cause he was mentioned by ephemer? if so is the player ventus or probably new character?

 

[Luxu]

Am I the only one who ever thought of Dark Chirithy as just sticking to someone with a strong light? Because the brighter a light the darker the shadow, our light was so strong it made another Chirithy one that is darkness. At least, that is what I pulled from it. And Gula could have easily been referring towards something in the book, probably talking about another survivor that fought and lived.

question is the player canon to the story? cause he was mentioned by ephemer? if so is the player ventus or probably new character?

I say its a new character, mainly because...Well, lets be honest here a new character means more room to do whatever they want. And its Square, everyone is expecting "us" to be Ven by this point.