Talk:Krahka

BZPower Page

BZPower doesn't seem to have a direct link to combiner pages. What to do? --KZN02, The Master of Tediousness (^Talk|^Contribs) 22:10, 30 December 2012 (PST)

table

The table was a bit much for listing her forms, but I think the list isn't enough... There's no visual for the less obvious forms. I absolutely think the table is ideal for the makuta pages though. Thoughts? Intelligence4 (talk) 04:57, 10 May 2014 (CEST)

Obviously, I agree with you that the table should be kept on the Teridax/Antroz pages. I've also installed one on Triglax's page; since he's only used two known forms in his appearances, I don't think anyone has any cause to object. Krahka is the problem child, though. I think a table is the way to go, but I'm not averse to trimming it a little. Maybe we should only include the forms that have an image, and the rest can be listed underneath? Not sure. The imperative thing is that, for anyone interested in all the forms Krahka can take, we need some sort of handy record in one place, so this decision had better be made soon. --Angel Bob (talk) 16:03, 10 May 2014 (CEST)

I think the only reason the table was a problem was because it was so big? i didn't really think it was that much of an issue, although it was kinda annoying to scroll so long. what if we just kept the list as is and then added images throughout the list? or if there was a way to make the table smaller and still keep all the entries that would be great. I think you and i are basically in agreement on this issue. Intelligence4 (talk) 22:43, 10 May 2014 (CEST)

Ideally I WOULD like it if we could include the forms list on the page, but it's so unwieldy in most instances (and I've been meaning to trim Teridax's down as it is). The plan, in theory, would be to use tabber to create a more usable forms table, so if somebody wants to do that... -- I AM THE DOREK _{do not truffle with me} 03:14, 13 May 2014 (CEST)

I can't volunteer my services because I'm not a programmer sort of guy, but I encourage this wholeheartedly -- the current table format looks outdated next to the new templates and navboxes. And yeah, Terry's could use some trimming ("Makuta Nui" comes to mind), but not too much, methinks. --Angel Bob (talk) 03:18, 13 May 2014 (CEST)

Haha, Makuta Nui is actually one of the ones I want to keep, it's just stuff like Matoro's body that I think are a bit too extraneous (same with Chirox and the Exo-Toa). Also the "Antidermis" as a specific form always looks more like filler than actual necessary content.

Anyhow, that's my general plan. Using the code from Characters shouldn't be too hard... hopefully. -- I AM THE DOREK _{do not truffle with me} 03:30, 13 May 2014 (CEST)

Species Name

According to this: https://greg.thegreatarchives.com/2003-2008/page79#post3156 Krahka is a species name, not the name of the individual. ~ Wolk (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Greg may have changed his mind about this. The Krahka entry in Bionicle: Encyclopedia Updated says that "Krahka believed that she was the only member of her species," which seems to suggest Krahka is the individual's name. -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 00:45, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I just flipped through The Darkness Below, and Whenua says "It's called a Krahka" on page 56. BIONICLE: Encyclopedia Updated also refers to her as "the Krahka" in Tahtorak's entry on page 134 (indicating that Greg had not changed his mind about this later on while writing the encyclopedia). Finally, Rahi Beasts explicitly says "there were actually many more Krahka in another land" on page 54. I think that definitely proves that Krahka is not an individual name, but a species name. --PeabodySam (talk) 00:15, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Should we change the wording to not refer to her as someone named Krahka? ~ Wolk (talk) 00:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't think so, the other characters called her simply Krahka, and after she was the last of her kind, she wasn't referenced as "A Krahka" in the later story. I tend to think she adopted the species name as her own both for honoring it and because that's how the Metru/Hordika and the Rahaga called her.--Surel (Talk) 09:21, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Does Krahka need to see a power to copy it?

It's clear that Krahka needs to see a being in order to copy their form, but does she need to also see a power in use in order to copy it? One quote says she doesn't,[1] but two more say she does[2][3] (there's another quote,[4] but Greg simply says "yes" to two opposite questions; "Does Krahka need to see someone use a power for her to use it herself? e.g. She sees a Toa of Sonics but he doesn't use his powers. Can she use his abilities?"), both of which suggest she can copy the form and at least some of the powers of a Makuta, which disagrees with two earlier quotes.[5][6] Although, this discrepancy with Makuta can be rectified if Krahka can copy a form without copying all of its powers, but this disagrees with two other quotes.[7][8] I tried to keep an eye out while going through the books to see if there was something that could help, but I didn't see anything definitive, though it's possible I missed something. Dag (talk) 04:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Power vs Ability

I touched on this problem briefly on the Powers talk page, but I wanted to revisit and expand on it here. There's one quote for Krahka's shapeshifting being a natural ability[1] and two for it being a power.[2][3] However, my main concern for it being a power is with the Faxon. If it is a power, then the Faxon should be able to copy it, but to do so, the user must share Krahka's environment. What is the environment of a Rahi that can take any form? That of her original form, or maybe her form at the moment of the Faxon's use? This makes me want to side with the one quote for it being a natural ability, but on the other hand, this "ability" allows her to take on the powers of others. Same as the previous topic, I'm mainly putting this here to outline the contradictions, regardless of whether a solution is even possible. Dag (talk) 21:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)