Leaderboard

Yes there's a difference, although it's worth noting a few things: 1) The Jedi Temple on Coruscant was only established a few decades prior after their main temple on Ossus was destroyed in the Great Sith War. This new temple on Coruscant was the same temple at the time of the prequels but it took centuries to get to the point of where it was in the movies. 2) The Jedi weren't very popular at this time and Dantooine seemed to be more of a private place where the Jedi were able to go while Coruscant was more where they handled public relations b/c of their relationship with the Republic government 3) All the Jedi even on the high council knew about Dantooine and visited there at various times. They all seem to be reminiscing that it's "not what it once was" when the group of them gather at the end of Kotor 2. Not to mention at least one of them--Vrook Lamar--seemed to hold membership in both councils. 4) Bastila seems rather shaken when Dantooine's enclave is destroyed b/c she acts like there's no hope left. You'd think she'd rest more easy in terms of the long run if the main Jedi force was in fact on Coruscant 5) It's mentioned in Kotor 2 that Atris' primary target for saving relics was Dantooine. Later if you mention her survival to the jedi masters, one of them says, "it's good she survived since she has most of the Jedi knowledge." This hints that Dantooine was actually where the Jedis' main assets were but that Coruscant at the time was most likely their main "public" area they established to have a relationship with the Republic.