As someone in North America, all we hear about is the treaty of Versailles, nothing about the treaty of Trianon. I guess firstly why did there have to be two seperate treaties for germany and Austri-Hungary and did they differe greatly? Such as the massive indemnities, war-guilt and restriction of military?
Well first thing, there needed to be separate treaties because the Central Powers were four (five after 1918 and the breakup of Austria-Hungary) individual states. The Allied and Associated Powers largely negotiated among themselves the terms to be presented to each state, and there was little if any negotiation between the Allied and Associated Powers and the defeated states on the terms. Versailles was with Germany, Trianon with Hungary, Saint-Germain-en-Laye with Austria, Neuilly-sur-Seine with Bulgaria and Sèvres with the Ottoman Empire.
The Treaty of Trianon included military restrictions in Part V (Articles 102-143) including restrictions on the size of the army to 35,000 men (Art. 104), and other related articles concerning the staff, composition and equipment of the army as in Versailles
Parts VIII and IX concerned reparations and financial issues, and the key Articles 161-164 were largely copies of Articles 231-234 of the Treaty of Versailles (including the infamous 'war guilt clause'*)
*what this really was a legal mechanism for justifying reparations - the British were uncomfortable with demanding payments without any 'admission' or ruling of responsibility. By requiring that the defeated states accept 'responsibility', then it was justified to claim that they pay damages for the losses they had 'caused'.