Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Fight takes place in a wide open area which is indestructible.

Smaug

Balrog

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Balrog Based on ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
Based on ?

Common phuckin sense!

Originally posted by Firefly218
Common phuckin sense! Explain it. Shouldn't be too hard since you are common.

3 out of the 7 Smaug could probably take out - that includes the one in Moria. The Balrogs of Morgoth were Maiar spirits just like Sauron, but of the Ainur the Valar were the masters of the Maiar - and of the 12 Valar Melkor was the greatest, and he gave unto the creation of the Dragons portions of his power.

Gothmog decimates, Gothmog the Balrog Leader could probably at least put up a fight against Ancalagon, the mightiest of the winged dragons whose creation expended a great deal of Morgoth's last powers. But, ultimately, the dragons were greater in strength.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Common phuckin sense!

He doesn't have any. Welcome to KMC.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Fight takes place in a wide open area which is indestructible.

Balrog.

(subject to change if Smaug happens to do something amazing in the 3rd film that isn't in the book)

Originally posted by Robtard
Balrog.

(subject to change if Smaug happens to do something amazing in the 3rd film that isn't in the book) Based on what ?


What did the Balrog do that was so amazing ? Saruman bested Gandalf the Grey yet he beat the thing to death solo.

Balrog wins.

Fire won't do shit to Durin's Bane, and the last thing Smaug wants to do is manfight it in CQC.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Balrog wins.

Fire won't do shit to Durin's Bane, and the last thing Smaug wants to do is manfight it in CQC. Smaug's teeth and sheer size advantage will be the difference here. Fire won't do shit to Smaug either.

Smaug has the strength, agility and speed advantage - apart from one scale he's faaar more durable. I don't see the Balrog of Moria being able to exploit the scale as his weapons are too large, he's slower and less agile. :/

I'm also unsure of that Balrog's ability to tank Smaug's fireballs.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Balrog wins.

Fire won't do shit to Durin's Bane, and the last thing Smaug wants to do is manfight it in CQC.

Cant see Gandalf phuckin up Smaug.

Balrog is definetly gazillion times more badass.

Originally posted by Utrigita
Are you serious ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
Based on what ?


What did the Balrog do that was so amazing ? Saruman bested Gandalf the Grey yet he beat the thing to death solo.

Based on actually watching Fellowship, Two Towers, Unexpected Journey and Desolation of Smaug and going with screen feats.

Balrog has better feats (thus far): Surviving a multi-kilometer fall, battling Gandalf for days. Finally dying from an lightning-charged magical sword. Gandalf said Durin's Bane was beyond any of the Fellowship crew, which are some of the best fighters humanity, elves and dwarven kind have to offer.

Now, what did Smaug do/feats are you basing your Smaug > Balrog on? Or are you once again basing your argument on your Benedict Cumberbatch man-crush.

Originally posted by Robtard
Based on actually watching Fellowship, Two Towers, Unexpected Journey and Desolation of Smaug and going with screen feats.

Balrog has better feats (thus far): Surviving a multi-kilometer fall, battling Gandalf for days. Finally dying from an lightning-charged magical sword. Gandalf said Durin's Bane was beyond any of the Fellowship crew, which are some of the best fighters humanity, elves and dwarven kind have to offer.

Now, what did Smaug do/feats are you basing your Smaug > Balrog on? Or are you once again basing your argument on your Benedict Cumberbatch man-crush. Saruman beat Gandalf in a few minutes.

Balrog has no exceptional feats. Smaug decimated a town in no time. He has withstood being immerses in gold all over his body. Smaug destroyed parts of the castle easily. His fire also seems vastly more impressive than Balrog's which was blocked by Gandalf the Grey.


Watch the films. Decimating a town and what I already said on top of the size and mobility advantage. Balrog went down to someone Saruman beat it a few minutes.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Saruman beat Gandalf in a few minutes.

Balrog has no exceptional feats. Smaug decimated a town in no time. He has withstood being immerses in gold all over his body. Smaug destroyed parts of the castle easily. His fire also seems vastly more impressive than Balrog's which was blocked by Gandalf the Grey.

Watch the films. Decimating a town and what I already said on top of the size and mobility advantage. Balrog went down to someone Saruman beat it a few minutes.

A red herring tactic

Ignoring the Balrog's feats is not proper debating, Quanchi. There is nothing to suggest that the Balrog couldn't destroy a human town in turn, if "burning a town down" is the maker now.

Smaug was damaged by what is essentially a ballista bolt and dies from one in the 3rd film Balrog's weapons would hurt Smaug.

So you have no real feats and are basing your argument on which character you like more and well your known man-crush. Granted, Smaug
is a much more likeable character, but that's not a proper MvF argument.

Originally posted by Robtard
A red herring tactic

Ignoring the Balrog's feats is not proper debating, Quanchi. There is nothing to suggest that the Balrog couldn't destroy a human town in turn, if "burning a town down" is the maker now.

Smaug was damaged by what is essentially a ballista bolt and dies from one in the 3rd film Balrog's weapons would hurt Smaug.

So you have no real feats and are basing your argument on which character you like more and well your known man-crush. Granted, Smaug
is a much more likeable character, but that's not a proper MvF argument An old wizard beat him in a few minutes with tk attacks.


Except he didn't. Smaug did. We don't talk about what ifs we talk about facts. Debate like a man.

A special weapon designed to pierce him with the speed Balrog doesn't have to inflict the damage.


I just went over the feats. You said Balrog could have which means he doesn't have the feats Smaug has. I could care less who is more likeable you woman. Smaug has greater feats, is more durable, faster, and is smarter.

Originally posted by quanchi112
An old wizard beat him in a few minutes with tk attacks.

Except he didn't. Smaug did. We don't talk about what ifs we talk about facts. Debate like a man.

A special weapon designed to pierce him with the speed Balrog doesn't have to inflict the damage.

I just went over the feats. You said Balrog could have which means he doesn't have the feats Smaug has. I could care less who is more likeable you woman. Smaug has greater feats, is more durable, faster, and is smarter.

More red herrings.

No shit, it was a snide remark on your ridiculousness. Blarog's feat > Smaug's thus far. But it's hilarious that you can't comprehend how a being composed in part of fire couldn't start a fire

The black arrow is for all intents and purposes just a well crafted metal bolt. This is what damages Smaug.

What do you base your "Balrog can't harm Smaug" on?

Your feats are "Smaug burned down a town!". An army of Orcs could do that with enough torches. You care, you're Cumberbatch man-crushing again, it's clear to all.

Greater feats you can't name.

How is Smaug more durable? The Balrog survived a multi kilometer fall.

What do you base your "Smaug is smarter" on? Just because he talked? He was tricked by the dwarves. His intelligence is also offset by his arrogance.

That's three questions you keep dodging, care to answer them now?

Originally posted by Robtard
More red herrings.

No shit, it was a snide remark on your rediculouslness. Blarog's feat > Smaug's thus far. But it's hilarious that you can't comprehend how a being composed in part of fire couldn't start a fire

The black arrow is for all intents and purposes just a well crafted metal bolt. This is what damages Smaug.

What do you base your "Balrog can't harm Smaug" on?

Your feats are "Smaug burned down a town!". An army of Orcs could do that with enough torches. You care, you're Cumberbatch man-crushing again, it's clear to all.

Greater feats you can't name.

How is Smaug more durable? The Balrog survived a multi kilometer fall.

What do you base your "Smaug is smarter" on? Just because he talked? His intelligence is also offset by his arrogance. Weak tk attacks can hurt Gandalf and you can continue to ignore his hilarious defeat at the hands of Saruman.

Balrog doesn't have any feats other than being beaten by a weak Gandalf the Grey who Saruman beat in moments. Balrog has no impressive feats. Smaug has far more impressive feats.


It is a special weapon crafted for the purpose of destroying him fired with a lot of speed and force behind it. Balrog has neither. His fire weapons won't work on Smaug.


I've seen Legolas himself take down many orcs without even pushing himself. Comparing Smaug to orcs is just lol worthy. What's funny is Gandalf runs from orcs but stood his ground against Balrog. Irony.

Smaug destroyed structures in the dwarves stronghold and tanked boiling hot gold quite easily. Acting like his armor like skin couldn't survive the fall when Gandalf was is quite idiotic even for you.

The fact Smaug successfully took the stronghold and knew which dwarves were behind it. The Balrog just shows up and attacks displaying no intelligence at all. I guess a dog who fights a human has as much as intelligence as a human. You are the worst.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Weak tk attacks can hurt Gandalf and you can continue to ignore his hilarious defeat at the hands of Saruman.

Balrog doesn't have any feats other than being beaten by a weak Gandalf the Grey who Saruman beat in moments. Balrog has no impressive feats. Smaug has far more impressive feats.

It is a special weapon crafted for the purpose of destroying him fired with a lot of speed and force behind it. Balrog has neither. His fire weapons won't work on Smaug.

I've seen Legolas himself take down many orcs without even pushing himself. Comparing Smaug to orcs is just lol worthy. What's funny is Gandalf runs from orcs but stood his ground against Balrog. Irony.

Smaug destroyed structures in the dwarves stronghold and tanked boiling hot gold quite easily. Acting like his armor like skin couldn't survive the fall when Gandalf was is quite idiotic even for you.

The fact Smaug successfully took the stronghold and knew which dwarves were behind it. The Balrog just shows up and attacks displaying no intelligence at all. I guess a dog who fights a human has as much as intelligence as a human. You are the worst.


More red herrings.

The Balrog was defeated by a magical sword magically charged with lightning. Your insistence that Gandalf is "weak" just makes you look like an idiot.

It's a well crafted ballista bolt; so stop trying to make it more than what was said/shown. The Balrog's weapons aren't just fire/heat, they're physical and have force behind them. Watch LoTR already. You've done this same clown-show before.

Idiotic non sequitor ranting, so I'll just ignore that.

That liquid gold hurt him, hence his yelling. Did you not pay attention? So now you're giving Smaug feats he's not shown and he would surely survive a massive dead fall. Sorry, that's not how we debate.

"Displaying no intelligence at all". You're such a buffoon. It attacking and defending what is now its home is some form of intelligence. You trying to pretend the Balrog is like a plant is hilarious and shows you have nothing.

So what do we have, Balrog's far more durable in surviving a massive free fall, it's not damaged by normal weapons like Smaug is.

Originally posted by Robtard
"Displaying no intelligence at all". You're such a buffoon. It attacking and defending what is now its home is some form of intelligence. You trying to pretend the Balrog is like a plant is hilarious and shows you have nothing.


That has always confused me a bit in the movie, is it the Balrog that kills the dwarfs in the mines of moria or is it the orcs? As I recall it's hinted to being the Balrog?

Originally posted by Utrigita
That has always confused me a bit in the movie, is it the Balrog that kills the dwarfs in the mines of moria or is it the orcs? As I recall it's hinted to being the Balrog?

The Balrog it seems.

Gandalf says something like 'in their greed, the dwarves tunneled too deep and awakened the Balrog'. The goblins/orcs moved in after the dwarves were crushed or after they were severely weakened by the Balrog.

Originally posted by Robtard
The Balrog it seems.

Gandalf says that in their greed, the dwarves tunneled too deep and awakened the Balrog. The goblins/orcs moved in after the Dwarves were crushed or after they were severely weakened by the Balrog.

Cool, it's been some time since I last watched could just recall something along the lines of "You know that they have awakened in the darkness of hazadome Shadow and Flame."

Originally posted by Utrigita
Cool, it's been some time since I last watched could just recall something along the lines of "You know that they have awakened in the darkness of hazadome Shadow and Flame."

My error. It was Saruman saying it to Gandalf:

"Moria... You fear to go into those mines. The dwarves delved too greedily and too deep. You know what they awoke in the darkness of Khazad-dum... shadow and flame." -Saruman

The Balrog also being called "Durin's Bane" is self evident that the Balrog kicked the dwarves of Moria's ass after they awakened it.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Weak tk attacks can hurt Gandalf and you can continue to ignore his hilarious defeat at the hands of Saruman.

Balrog doesn't have any feats other than being beaten by a weak Gandalf the Grey who Saruman beat in moments. Balrog has no impressive feats. Smaug has far more impressive feats.


It is a special weapon crafted for the purpose of destroying him fired with a lot of speed and force behind it. Balrog has neither. His fire weapons won't work on Smaug.


I've seen Legolas himself take down many orcs without even pushing himself. Comparing Smaug to orcs is just lol worthy. What's funny is Gandalf runs from orcs but stood his ground against Balrog. Irony.

Smaug destroyed structures in the dwarves stronghold and tanked boiling hot gold quite easily. Acting like his armor like skin couldn't survive the fall when Gandalf was is quite idiotic even for you.

The fact Smaug successfully took the stronghold and knew which dwarves were behind it. The Balrog just shows up and attacks displaying no intelligence at all. I guess a dog who fights a human has as much as intelligence as a human. You are the worst.


Gandalf is not weak. He is one of the most powerful wizards inn middle earth. Also, losing to sauruman is no embarrassment considering his power, not to mention gandalf has defeated sauruman in various occasions.

Originally posted by Robtard
Gandalf said Durin's Bane was beyond any of the Fellowship crew, which are some of the best fighters...elves and dwarven kind have to offer.



Originally posted by Estacado
Cant see Gandalf phuckin up Smaug.

Balrog is definetly gazillion times more badass.

Originally posted by Oneness



Aragorn's no chump.

Its all about matchups

Gandalf may have been less dominant against other wizards, but had the advantage versus balrog.
Same way, balrog didn't do so good against another wizard, but has the advantage against smaug.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Gandalf is not weak. He is one of the most powerful wizards inn middle earth. Also, losing to sauruman is no embarrassment considering his power, not to mention gandalf has defeated sauruman in various occasions.

Quanchi can't debate well, so he resorts to clownish shit slinging tactics to the character(s) he hates/wants to see lose.

Smaug's scales are virtually impenetrable, he is far larger, and he has single-handily destroyed entire armies. Smaug takes this.

Originally posted by Utrigita
That has always confused me a bit in the movie, is it the Balrog that kills the dwarfs in the mines of moria or is it the orcs? As I recall it's hinted to being the Balrog?

The Balrog. He kills there king and prince causing the dwarves to flee.

Still, unlike Smaug, he never fights their assembled armies.

Smaug's "impenetrable scales" have zero feats within the movie, sans being immune to conventional arrows and the like. They were still knocked off by some plot-device "black arrow".

I don't see how he takes this. His primary weapon is completely useless against the Balrog.

EDIT- And this hyping of Smaug needs to calm its ****. He was a stooge in Desolation. There should have been benny hill music playing in the background while he was chasing the dwarves. Mother****er's standing on your mouth and you can't get him? Shit was like a Tom and Jerry cartoon.

Such a disservice to a badass character.

Smaug seems to be more formidable on paper, but I don't see how he can really put down Balrog here. Unless he just decides to flap his wings really hard and blow the flames of Rog away(which in itself is an unfeasible scenario), Balrog wins imo.

Actually, Smaug wears mithril mail to cover his belly where the scales are weaker. The reason Smaug died was because there was a small crack in that mail for the arrow to pass through.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Smaug's "impenetrable scales" have zero feats within the movie, sans being immune to conventional arrows and the like. They were still knocked off by some plot-device "black arrow".

I don't see how he takes this. His primary weapon is completely useless against the Balrog.

They were knocked off by a ballista. That's quite a large amount of force behind that 'arrow'.

Perhaps, the Balrog could knock off a couple of Smaug's scales. But even then, he needs to stab at the exact same place. Smaug meanwhile, can smack the Balrog silly with his tail and a single chomp should end the fight.

Originally posted by Robtard
More red herrings.

The Balrog was defeated by a magical sword magically charged with lightning. Your insistence that Gandalf is "weak" just makes you look like an idiot.

It's a well crafted ballista bolt; so stop trying to make it more than what was said/shown. The Balrog's weapons aren't just fire/heat, they're physical and have force behind them. Watch LoTR already. You've done this same clown-show before.

Idiotic non sequitor ranting, so I'll just ignore that.

That liquid gold hurt him, hence his yelling. Did you not pay attention? So now you're giving Smaug feats he's not shown and he would surely survive a massive dead fall. Sorry, that's not how we debate.

"Displaying no intelligence at all". You're such a buffoon. It attacking and defending what is now its home is some form of intelligence. You trying to pretend the Balrog is like a plant is hilarious and shows you have nothing.

So what do we have, Balrog's far more durable in surviving a massive free fall, it's not damaged by normal weapons like Smaug is. continuing to repeat red herring isn't debating.

The Balrog was fought to a standstill prior till the lightning amped strike. One old wizard fought him hand to hand and defeated him. The same old wizard who flees from orcs and was beaten by Saruman. Facts.

Yes, the force behind them was less than that of Saruman's tk attacks which left minor cuts and bruises since this defeated Gandalf. Gandalf fought him head on. Try to play it up despite the lack of feats and ignoring Gandalf's embarrassing moments.

The movie made it clear how powerful these weapons which pierce the dragon are and how they were vital to defeating him. I'm willing to bet this will take him down.


An animal displays the same intelligence to protecting its territory so my analogy is right on. Smaug displayed real intelligence yet Balrog did not. Yet you have the audacity to say how is Smaug smarter. You're an absolute buffoon.

The dragon flew into buildings and towers without any real pain or significant damage. Yet you think a fall which didn't kill Gandalf can kill Smaug. You're the absolute worst debater. His skin is like armor and we've seen him fly through giant structures easily like its an afterthought.

The gold covered his entire body but did no significant damage. His skin is armor.


Smaug was not damaged by normal weapons. The movie made it clear but what weapons did the Balrog shrug off. You are making feats up yet again. Gandalf took the thing down hand to hand without any aid.

Originally posted by Astner
Actually, Smaug wears mithril mail to cover his belly where the scales are weaker. The reason Smaug died was because there was a small crack in that mail for the arrow to pass through. Not sure that's correct, in the book his belly is augmented by the gold, gems and jewels that became impregnated in this scale from decades of sleeping on treasure.

But regardless, this is a movies only match. A metal bolt has thus far broken his scales and a well placed metal bolt will eventually kill him.

So how badass was Smaug? What was his fire like?

Originally posted by Firefly218
Gandalf is not weak. He is one of the most powerful wizards inn middle earth. Also, losing to sauruman is no embarrassment considering his power, not to mention gandalf has defeated sauruman in various occasions. There are like five wizards on middle earth and we saw him lose to Saruman. Not really impressive.

Gandalf beat him when he was the White version but this is the Grey were are referring to who beat The Balrog by himself.

Originally posted by Nephthys
So how badass was Smaug? What was his fire like?
Hot enough to restart a bunch of cold furnaces which couldn't be started by any "normal fire", and melt/burn even solid stone.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not sure that's correct, in the book his belly is augmented by the gold, gems and jewels that became impregnated in this scale from decades of sleeping on treasure.
May well have been, I read the Hobbit when the Fellowship of the Ring movie came out.

Originally posted by Robtard
But regardless, this is a movies only match. A metal bolt has thus far broken his scales and a well placed metal bolt will eventually kill him.
So we can't use any other sources?

So without reading the books...to kill Smaug you have to use a dwarf ballista weapon with a black arrow......why the phuck didnt they build more?
I mean they didnt look too complex....srug

Originally posted by Astner
So the Balrogs fought two Edar and a Maiar to a standstill, whereas the dragons were slayed by three men and an half-elf.

Now granted, the dragon slayers weren't schmucks, but reading the books it definitely felt that the Balrogs had some leverage when compared to dragons.

Well, let's be fair here. In the two instances we see the dragon slayed neither were killed in one-on-one combat. Turin uses surprise to kill Glaurung. As for Smaug, he is laying waste to a city when Bard slays him. We don't actually know how Ancalagon or Scatha were slain.

By contrast, the Balrogs were all slain in one-on-one combat.

Originally posted by Estacado
So without reading the books...to kill Smaug you have to use a dwarf ballista weapon with a black arrow......why the phuck didnt they build more?
I mean they didnt look too complex....srug

Only in the movie version. In the books, Smaug is killed by a "magic" arrow.

Originally posted by Epicurus
Hot enough to restart a bunch of cold furnaces which couldn't be started by any "normal fire", and melt/burn even solid stone.

Hmmm, I was think of doing a Smaug vs Elsa thread, but he sounds too powerful.

Originally posted by quanchi112
continuing to repeat red herring isn't debating.

The Balrog was fought to a standstill prior till the lightning amped strike. One old wizard fought him hand to hand and defeated him. The same old wizard who flees from orcs and was beaten by Saruman. Facts.

Yes, the force behind them was less than that of Saruman's tk attacks which left minor cuts and bruises since this defeated Gandalf. Gandalf fought him head on. Try to play it up despite the lack of feats and ignoring Gandalf's embarrassing moments.

The movie made it clear how powerful these weapons which pierce the dragon are and how they were vital to defeating him. I'm willing to bet this will take him down.

An animal displays the same intelligence to protecting its territory so my analogy is right on. Smaug displayed real intelligence yet Balrog did not. Yet you have the audacity to say how is Smaug smarter. You're an absolute buffoon.

The dragon flew into buildings and towers without any real pain or significant damage. Yet you think a fall which didn't kill Gandalf can kill Smaug. You're the absolute worst debater. His skin is like armor and we've seen him fly through giant structures easily like its an afterthought.

The gold covered his entire body but did no significant damage. His skin is armor.

Smaug was not damaged by normal weapons.

The movie made it clear but what weapons did the Balrog shrug off. You are making feats up yet again. Gandalf took the thing down hand to hand without any aid.



At least you stopped using that red herring. Congrats

Regardless of yor clownish downplaying, lightning charged Glamdring > what is essentially just a well crafted metal bolt.

Keep insisting that Gandalf is "weak", it just makes you look like an ignorant ass.

Now you're just making stuff up to suit your failed argument. A ballista bolt > The Balrog PROVE IT.

Strawman. I did not say "Smaug is smarter". And now you're backpedaling, you insisted the Balrog had zero intelligence before.

So you can't prove that Smaug would survive the dead fall the Balrog did. It's not a Smaug feat, so stop insisting it is.

You claimed the gold didn't harm him at all. It burned him to some degree, hence his complaining. The film > your fantasies.

The black arrow is essentially a "normal weapon". It's a ballista bolt, not some magical bolt charged with energies.

Again, you need to actually watch the LoTR trilogy and stop youtube debating. Gandalf made it clear that normal weapons wouldn't harm it.

Originally posted by Estacado
So without reading the books...to kill Smaug you have to use a dwarf ballista weapon with a black arrow......why the phuck didnt they build more?
I mean they didnt look too complex....srug It takes skill to use this weapon and you also have to contend with a very fast and destructive fire breathing dragon at the same time. The town was nothing to Smaug's wrath. Even the elves had wanted no piece of Smaug. Arrows don't easily hurt this dragon or else the elves would have roasted it. Smaug is a big deal.


Cumberpatch you glorious human being you've done it again. Watch the nerds cry as I roast them all.

Originally posted by ares834
Well, let's be fair here. In the two instances we see the dragon slayed neither were killed in one-on-one combat. Turin uses surprise to kill Glaurung. As for Smaug, he is laying waste to a city when Bard slays him. We don't actually know how Ancalagon or Scatha were slain.

By contrast, the Balrogs were all slain in one-on-one combat.



Only in the movie version. In the books, Smaug is killed by a "magic" arrow.
Oh...should have made it like that in the movie as well.

Originally posted by Estacado
So without reading the books...to kill Smaug you have to use a dwarf ballista weapon with a black arrow
In the books, the black arrow was fired from a bow, and it wasn't a magical arrow--not explicitly anyways--and the reason it killed Smaug was due to luck.

Originally posted by ares834




Only in the movie version. In the books, Smaug is killed by a "magic" arrow.

The Black Arrow in the books is never stated to be magical, iirc. Unless you have a quote? Not that it matters though, since the movie it's clearly not.

Originally posted by Robtard
Again, you need to actually watch the LoTR trilogy and stop youtube debating. Gandalf made it clear that normal weapons wouldn't harm it.

Only if we take Gandalf's statement as literal. And we shouldn't considering a few moments later we see Gandalf hurting the Balrog with his sword.

Originally posted by Estacado
Oh...should have made it like that in the movie as well.

Agreed.

Originally posted by quanchi112


Cumberpatch you glorious human being you've done it again. Watch the nerds cry as I roast them all.

At least spell correctly the name of the man-crush you have.

Originally posted by ares834
Only if we take Gandalf's statement as literal. And we shouldn't considering a few moments later we see Gandalf hurting the Balrog with his sword.

Why shouldn't we take it literally? Glamdring is magical, he also had to magically charge it with lightning to kill the Balrog.

Originally posted by Robtard
The Black Arrow in the books is never stated to be magical, iirc. Unless you have a quote? Not that it matters though, since the movie it's clearly not.

Never directly stated to be magic, no. But, considering it never missed and he has always recovered it and it's a ancient family heirloom it seems like a logical conclusion.

Originally posted by Robtard
At least you stopped using that red herring. Congrats

Regardless of yor clownish downplaying, lightning charged Glamdring > what is essentially just a well crafted metal bolt.

Keep insisting that Gandalf is "weak", it just makes you look like an ignorant ass.

Now you're just making stuff up to suit your failed argument. A ballista bolt > The Balrog

Strawman. I did not say "Smaug is smarter". And now you're backpedaling, you insisted the Balrog had zero intelligence before.

So you can't prove that Smaug would survive the dead fall the Balrog did. It's not a Smaug feat, so stop insisting it is.

You claimed the gold didn't harm him at all. It burned him to some degree, hence his complaining. The film > your fantasies.

The black arrow is essentially a "normal weapon". It's a ballista bolt, not some magical bolt charged with energies.

Again, you need to actually watch the LoTR trilogy and stop youtube debating. Gandalf made it clear that normal weapons wouldn't harm it. You conceded the point.

The sword strike doesn't have the force behind it. One attack already hit Smaug with far greater force whereas Gandalf killed Balrog with the strike.

He is weak when compared to Saruman and Smaug. There is a reason he throws fiery pine cones when he's literally stuck on a tree.

If someone had a ballista weapon they would defeat the Balrog. He is slow and wouldn't be able to close the distance in time.

I said Smaug is smarter. You said based on what. You're an idiot. A dog defending his territory such intelligence he displayed.

Watch the opening scene for Smaug. Or watch his scenes in which his flight is considerably faster than falling from that scene. Continue to make asinine claims while ignoring Smaug's feats.


There was no visible damage and he was fine after he got it off him. Being immerses in boiling gold left no serious marks. Awesome feat.


You are ignoring the force of the bolt and the manner in which it was displayed In the film.


Normal weapons don't harm Smaug either. Funny how you pick and choose what applies. Balrog didn't seem powerful enough to defeat Gandalf either whereas Saruman was in moments.

Originally posted by Robtard
Why shouldn't we take it literally? Glamdring is magical, he also had to magically charge it with lightning to kill the Balrog.

Gandalf is hurting the Balrog during the fall. At no point in that struggle, is he seen charging his sword with lightning.

Originally posted by Robtard
At least spell correctly the name of the man-crush you have. I don't have to as I know it annoys you. You can't stand any character I like. I enjoy making you hate them. Another added bonus. Balrog goes down easily.

Balrog doesn't have a single advantage here.

Originally posted by ares834
Gandalf is hurting the Balrog during the fall. At no point in that struggle, is he seen charging his sword with lightning.

Glamdring is still magical and Gandalf is greater than mortals and elves, why he wasn't burned by fire and survived a massive fall.

Originally posted by ares834
Gandalf is hurting the Balrog during the fall. At no point in that struggle, is he seen charging his sword with lightning. Robbie picks and chooses based on who he likes more. Gandalf is taking him on in close combat despite the size advantage the Balrog has over him. I never understood the Balrog wank when he just got beat one on one. Gandalf needed aid against a cave troll for crying out loud.

Originally posted by Robtard
Glamdring is still magical and Gandalf is greater than mortals and elves, why he wasn't burned by fire and survived a massive fall. His sword isn't magical and it hurt him the entire way down. Awful showing for the Balrog.

Originally posted by quanchi112
His sword isn't magical and it hurt him the entire way down. Awful showing for the Balrog.

Glamdring is magical.

Originally posted by Robtard
Glamdring is still magical and Gandalf is greater than mortals and elves, why he wasn't burned by fire and survived a massive fall.

Gandalf directly states, "Swords are of no more use here." Not your swords, he says "swords". And he directly contradicts that a minute or so later. The logical conclusion is he was trying to get Aragorn away as he would have stood no chance against the Balrog.

Originally posted by Robtard
Glamdring is magical. His sword was not magical. He just wanted to spare his friends from this creature. Gandalf the Grey was enough to best a Balrog while fighting it in close quarter combat. Balrog is not impressive at all.

Originally posted by ares834
Gandalf directly states, "Swords are of no more use here." Not your swords, he says "swords". And he directly contradicts that a minute or so later. The logical conclusion is he was trying to get Aragorn away as he would have stood no chance against the Balrog.

Because they couldn't harm the Balrog. If all it takes to kill a Balrog is normal weapons, then Legolas could do it by myself with his speed, agility and accuracy.

It's also evidently clear that normal or magical stabs wouldn't kill the Balrog hence Gandalf after days of fighting magically charges his sword to finally kill it.

Originally posted by ares834
Gandalf directly states, "Swords are of no more use here." Not your swords, he says "swords". And he directly contradicts that a minute or so later. The logical conclusion is he was trying to get Aragorn away as he would have stood no chance against the Balrog. The logical conclusion would be that Gandalf's a ****ing wizard armed with an elvish blade and the others are not.

Gandalf lying so that he could scare the others into running away isn't a logical conclusion, dude. LOL

Sting lights up like a glow-rod in a rave, elvish rope can untie itself with a simple tug and actively harms evil creatures (it buuurns us, it freeeeezes!). Why are we having this discussion about the feasibility of Gandalf's elvish blade having magical properties?

Originally posted by Robtard
So you can't prove that Smaug would survive the dead fall the Balrog did. It's not a Smaug feat, so stop insisting it is.

Tbf, Smaug was more or less unfazed when falling down that deep pit/well in which Thorin managed to lure him into. Not sure whether it was as big as Balrog's fall, but I for one think that such a fall wouldn't really affect Smaug in the slightest either.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because they couldn't harm the Balrog. If all it takes to kill a Balrog is normal weapons, then Legolas could do it by myself with his speed, agility and accuracy.

Arrows that would have been tiny compared to the Balrog. Heck, considering the trouble Gandalf has piercing the Balrog's hide, it's doubtful that Legolas's arrows would even pierce the Balrog.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
The logical conclusion would be that Gandalf's a ****ing wizard armed with an elvish blade and the others are not.

Gandalf lying so that he could scare the others into running away isn't a logical conclusion, dude. LOL

Except it is... The Balrog never once displays immunity to normal weaponry. I mean WTF is Aragorn going to do with a sword, if he gets to close to the Balrog all he is going to do is burn. Plus when is it even stated that Elvish Blades have special demon kill properties? Quite simply they don't. They are just better made then others.

Beyond that, we see Saruman (the same kind of being as a Balrog) slain by a simple arrow.

There's nothing to contradict that statement. See my edit above.

Originally posted by Epicurus
Tbf, Smaug was more or less unfazed when falling down that deep pit/well in which Thorin managed to lure him into. Not sure whether it was as big as Balrog's fall, but I for one think that such a fall wouldn't really affect Smaug in the slightest either.

That fall was like a couple of steps compared to the fall the Balrog and Gandalf survived.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Sting lights up like a glow-rod in a rave, elvish rope can untie itself with a simple tug and actively harms evil creatures (it buuurns us, it freeeeezes!). Why are we having this discussion about the feasibility of Gandalf's elvish blade having magical properties?

I never said Gandalf's blade isn't magical. However, it is never described as having special demon slaying powers.

No distinction is made in the movies between magic and special demon slaying magic. The idea that because Gandalf's magical sword can hurt the Balrog despite not being explicitly stated to possess "demon slaying magic", normal weapons can hurt the Balrog (even though there's a direct statement from the Wizard stating that they can not) is fallacious. Gandalf is a wizard armed with a magical blade. That alone is enough to give credit to his statement that regular weapons can not harm it, simply by virtue of there being no precedent of non-magical weapons injuring it.

As I said earlier, Gandalf directly contradicts his statement as he says, "swords are no more use here." He doesn't say "normal swords" he says "swords". Yet, his sword does work on the Balrog and thus his earlier statement is contradicted.

Originally posted by Robtard
That fall was like a couple of steps compared to the fall the Balrog and Gandalf survived.
It seemed a couple hundred feet at the very least. If Gandalf survived it, then so could Smaug imo.

And how big is Smaug anyways? Like Balerion(Song of Ice and Fire)-sized big? If so, then I doubt a fall from that height should hurt him at all.

Originally posted by ares834
As I said earlier, Gandalf directly contradicts his statement as he says, "swords are no more use here." He doesn't say "normal swords" he says "swords". Yet, his sword does work on the Balrog and thus his earlier statement is contradicted. And? Did Gandalf have time to sit Aragon down and explain to him that the rest of the parties weapons would not work because they're pleebs armed with regular weapons while he is a wizard and is armed with a magical elvish blade? If you're so adamant to hang on this statement, does that mean that Gimli could have injured it, since he doesn't use a sword (he uses an axe), or Frodo (who uses a dagger)?

This is semantics. The argument is whether or not the Balrog can be harmed by normal weapons. We've seen Gandalf tell Aragorn that the parties' weapons are useless against it. We see the Balrog be killed by a wizard armed with a magical sword. What lends credit to your assertion that the Balrog can be harmed by non-magical weapons?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
If you're so adamant to hang on this statement, does that mean that Gimli could have injured it, since he doesn't use a sword (he uses an axe), or Frodo (who uses a dagger)?

Irony. I'm not the one adamant on hanging on to that statement at all. I'm the one saying it shouldn't be taken literally.

Originally posted by Epicurus
It seemed a couple hundred feet at the very least. If Gandalf survived it, then so could Smaug imo.

And how big is Smaug anyways? Like Balerion(Song of Ice and Fire)-sized big? If so, then I doubt a fall from that height should hurt him at all.

Absolutely not. Youtube the Gandalf/Balrog scene. They fall for over a minute. The last scene alone when the camera pans out over the lake shows several hundred feet that they have left to travel.

He's rather large and being bigger/heavier isn't necessarily an advantage when falling.

A Balrog is far more powerful then a dragon.

Originally posted by Robtard
Absolutely not.
I meant Smaug's pit, not the Balrog/Gandalf scene.
Originally posted by Robtard
Youtube the Gandalf/Balrog scene. They fall for over a minute.

He's rather large and being bigger/heavier isn't necessarily an advantage when falling.
Just saw it. Yeah, it does appear much deeper than the pit Smaug fell into. But still, Gandalf was able to survive the fall:
6cdc_OaAzQM
So Gandalf's durability is higher than Smaug's iyo? To me, this is like that scene in TDK where Batman and Rachel are falling down several storeys on a taxi, and Rachel somehow manages to survive but smh either ways.

Your body needs to be very durable simply to carry the immense weight at that size. The way Smaug was portrayed in that movie, he seemed the size of a hill or something. Plus his scales are also stronger/tougher than iron armor.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A Balrog is far more powerful then a dragon. No, it isn't. This is also a generalized statement and it depends on the dragon and on the Balrog. Smaug is far mightier than the Balrog. Greater feats, smarter, more durable, faster, and bigger. Smaug has all the advantages.

Originally posted by ares834
Irony. I'm not the one adamant on hanging on to that statement at all. I'm the one saying it shouldn't be taken literally. lol. The context of this discussion has got your number brah.

Originally posted by Robtard
Again, you need to actually watch the LoTR trilogy and stop youtube debating. Gandalf made it clear that normal weapons wouldn't harm it.
Originally posted by ares834
Only if we take Gandalf's statement as literal. And we shouldn't considering a few moments later we see Gandalf hurting the Balrog with his sword.


So what precedence from the movies are you using to contest the notion that the Balrog can only be harmed by magical weapons?

Originally posted by quanchi112
No, it isn't. This is also a generalized statement and it depends on the dragon and on the Balrog. Smaug is far mightier than the Balrog. Greater feats, smarter, more durable, faster, and bigger. Smaug has all the advantages.

But a Balrog is an old world demon while a dragon is a living magical creature. No dragon could ever stand to a Balrog. Balrogs cannot be killed by mortals, and dragons are mortal.

Originally posted by Epicurus
I meant Smaug's pit, not the Balrog/Gandalf scene.

Just saw it. Yeah, it does appear much deeper than the pit Smaug fell into. But still, Gandalf was able to survive the fall:

So Gandalf's durability is higher than Smaug's iyo? To me, this is like that scene in TDK where Batman and Rachel are falling down several storeys on a taxi, and Rachel somehow manages to survive but smh either ways.

Your body needs to be very durable simply to carry the immense weight at that size. The way Smaug was portrayed in that movie, he seemed the size of a hill or something. Plus his scales are also stronger/tougher than iron armor.


No, I'd not say Gandalf is more durable. Though he's clearly far greater than his form appears with surviving smacks from the Balrog and surviving a fall like that. He's also much smaller than either the Balrog and Smaug; he was also riding the Balrog so it took the lion's share of the impact.

I'd not say "size of a hill", though hills vary in size. Regardless, we go by movie feats and I think just about everyone knows how Smaug dies in the 3rd film. So unless Jackson does some of his own writing in making Smaug more bad-ass, the Balrog has better feats thus far.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
lol. The context of this discussion has got your number brah.

Um, what?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
So what precedence from the movies are you using to contest the notion that the Balrog can only be harmed by magical weapons?

The fact that it is never stated.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But a Balrog is an old world demon while a dragon is a living magical creature. No dragon could ever stand to a Balrog. Balrogs cannot be killed by mortals, and dragons are mortal. This is the movie version only. Acting like the No mortals can kill it is applying a fictional no limits fallacy.


Smaug would decimate the movie Balrog. Again, based off the movies he is smarter, bigger, faster, can fly, and has greater feats.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But a Balrog is an old world demon while a dragon is a living magical creature. No dragon could ever stand to a Balrog. Balrogs cannot be killed by mortals, and dragons are mortal.

Balrogs were killed by mortals. Hell, in HoME Tuor (a human) killed 5 Balrogs in a single battle. Now, admittedly, this is before Tolkien decided there should be only a handful of Balrogs but the notion that they can't be killed by mortals is not shared by the books.

Plus, Morgoth's final defense wasn't Balrogs but winged dragons. And their onslaught was so fierce they temporarily drove the very armies of heaven back.

Originally posted by quanchi112
This is the movie version only. Acting like the No mortals can kill it is applying a fictional no limits fallacy.


Smaug would decimate the movie Balrog. Again, based off the movies he is smarter, bigger, faster, can fly, and has greater feats.

I haven't seen the movie yet. I am only basing what I know from being a dungeon master, years ago. If we are limited to Tolkien only, then I don't know.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I haven't seen the movie yet. I am only basing what I know from being a dungeon master, years ago. If we are limited to Tolkien only, then I don't know. That explains your opinion. Once you see the movie its obvious Smaug decimates the Balrog.

Originally posted by ares834
Um, what?



The fact that it is never stated. Which isn't evidence. It isn't stated that non-magical weapons can hurt it, either.

Originally posted by Robtard
No, I'd not say Gandalf is more durable. Though he's clearly far greater than his form appears with surviving smacks from the Balrog and surviving a fall like that. He's also much smaller than either the Balrog and Smaug; he was also riding the Balrog so it took the lion's share of the impact.

I'd not say "size of a hill", though hills vary in size. Regardless, we go by movie feats and I think just about everyone knows how Smaug dies in the 3rd film. So unless Jackson does some of his own writing in making Smaug more bad-ass, the Balrog has better feats thus far.
I doubt any of the feats shown so far indicate that he'd be hurt from a fall like that.

I don't think that he can beat Balrog here, simply based on the nature of the opponents; one breathes fire to incinerate his foes, the other becomes fire to burn them alive. I am not 100% sure, but I think that iffy sword of Balrog's could likely penetrate Smaug's armored hide. What are its best feats?

Originally posted by quanchi112
That explains your opinion. Once you see the movie its obvious Smaug decimates the Balrog.

I will get back with you so. Maybe I can see it after Xmas.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I will get back with you so. Maybe I can see it after Xmas. Anything Cumberbatch touches turns to gold.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Anything Cumberbatch touches turns to gold.
Well, the Midas touch didn't really end well for its last user...

Originally posted by Epicurus
Well, the Midas touch didn't really end well for its last user... That is because it wasn't Benedict's golden touch.

Smaug wins

Originally posted by Supra
Smaug wins Quit riding my coattails.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Quit riding my coattails.

oh that which you dont have?

Originally posted by Supra
oh that which you dont have? Based on ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
Based on ?

nobody cares what you think we just laugh at you wasting your life here

Originally posted by Supra
nobody cares what you think we just laugh at you wasting your life here There goes your chances. Self made millionaire who lives on a farm. Eieio.

Originally posted by quanchi112
There goes your chances. Self made millionaire who lives on a farm. Eieio.

well someone has to milk the cows

Balrog's are simply beyond dragons. Unless we're talking about the king of the dragons.. balrog would normally win. even then if we're talking about the best dragon.. then we'd also have to mention gothmog. Normal humans have killed ragons... it has taken high elven elfs to kill Balrogs and they in turn died doing so. Seems pretty clear to me that Balrogs are above dragons.

Nice sig quan.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Balrog's are simply beyond dragons. Unless we're talking about the king of the dragons.. balrog would normally win. even then if we're talking about the best dragon.. then we'd also have to mention gothmog. Normal humans have killed ragons... it has taken high elven elfs to kill Balrogs and they in turn died doing so. Seems pretty clear to me that Balrogs are above dragons.

The "best" dragon, Ancalagon, was so big he crushed three mountains when he died... He destroys Gothmog and all the other balrogs at once.

And as I mentioned earlier, every time we have actually seen a dragon slain it isn't in a one-on-one battle. Heck, Turin, one of the great heroes of the Silmarillion, admitted he stood no chance against the dragon Glaurung in battle.

Gothmog was killed by Ecthelion.

Ancalagon is the only dragon I think could beat a Balrog.

He was also killed by birds. **** Ancalagon.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Balrog's are simply beyond dragons. Unless we're talking about the king of the dragons.. balrog would normally win. even then if we're talking about the best dragon.. then we'd also have to mention gothmog. Normal humans have killed ragons... it has taken high elven elfs to kill Balrogs and they in turn died doing so. Seems pretty clear to me that Balrogs are above dragons. Did you see the film yet ? Smaug definitely wins. Gandalf beat this weak thing. Glad can't take blows with Smaug.

First off,

your post didn't restrict this to being D. Bane's balrog.. it could be any number of them.. but even using just bane as the Balrog... we're talking about a creature from the older world.. from the same place Gandalf.. Saruman, Lady of the forest etc etc come from. We're talking about a being that is a maiar and essentially omniscience. The rule of thumb generally is the older the more powerful.. just look at the old elvish kings.. they are considerably more powerful than 3rd age elves. Shit, even their weapons are better. As stated... NORMAL HUMANS HAVE BEATEN DRAGONS AND LIVED THEMSELVES. It has taken high elven kings to beat balrogs and they are die in the process. Seems clear to me balrogs win

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
First off,

your post didn't restrict this to being D. Bane's balrog.. it could be any number of them.. but even using just bane as the Balrog... we're talking about a creature from the older world.. from the same place Gandalf.. Saruman, Lady of the forest etc etc come from. We're talking about a being that is a maiar and essentially omniscience. The rule of thumb generally is the older the more powerful.. just look at the old elvish kings.. they are considerably more powerful than 3rd age elves. Shit, even their weapons are better. As stated... NORMAL HUMANS HAVE BEATEN DRAGONS AND LIVED THEMSELVES. It has taken high elven kings to beat balrogs and they are die in the process. Seems clear to me balrogs win This is the movie forum genius which means only the movie versions.

Again, movie versions only. Quit with the hyperbole. Its awful. You don't even know how the movie versus works. Smaug has greater feats, is far bigger, is smarter, etc. The Balrog doesn't have one advantage.

Originally posted by quanchi112
This is the movie forum genius

Nice ten year old sarcasm

BTW, just because this is a movie adaption doesn't mean you can disregard the history and tale of the universe the movie is based in.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Birds.

Birds, man. There's no coming back from that.

BIG ANGEL BIRDS FROM ANGEL DUDE 2IC BRO.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
First off,

your post didn't restrict this to being D. Bane's balrog.. it could be any number of them.. but even using just bane as the Balrog... we're talking about a creature from the older world.. from the same place Gandalf.. Saruman, Lady of the forest etc etc come from. We're talking about a being that is a maiar and essentially omniscience. The rule of thumb generally is the older the more powerful.. just look at the old elvish kings.. they are considerably more powerful than 3rd age elves. Shit, even their weapons are better. As stated... NORMAL HUMANS HAVE BEATEN DRAGONS AND LIVED THEMSELVES. It has taken high elven kings to beat balrogs and they are die in the process. Seems clear to me balrogs win

Lol, Maiar aren't omnipotent or omniscience. Not even close. Heck, one of the mightiest of them, Melian, straight up said that no one could defeat the dragon Glaurung. Also you keep ignoring the fact that humans never actually beat dragons one-on-one. Not to mention, dragons shattered entire armies of first age Elves.

Seems pretty clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Birds.

Birds, man. There's no coming back from that.

And the Hosts of Valar. And it was Earendil, ME's "chosen one", that ultimately slew him somehow (presumibly with the Silmaril).

Gothmog, on the other hand, was impaled by Ecthelion's helm and tripped into a fountain where he drowned....

Ecthelion's sheer manliness echoes through eternity, like Russel Crowe.

Tolkein couldn't even be bothered to describe Ancalagon.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Nice ten year old sarcasm

BTW, just because this is a movie adaption doesn't mean you can disregard the history and tale of the universe the movie is based in. Yes, that is exactly what we do. We only use the movie versions. This isn't the book version, genius.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, that is exactly what we do. We only use the movie versions. This isn't the book version, genius.

It doesnt matter what version its is, the characters history and general identity remain intact. The only debatable aspect exclusive to a movie versus thread are movie feats and character depiction.

Edit: "genius"

Originally posted by quanchi112
That is because it wasn't Benedict's golden touch.
On a first-name basis with Cumberbatch, are we.

Originally posted by ares834
Lol, Maiar aren't omnipotent or omniscience. Not even close. Heck, one of the mightiest of them, Melian, straight up said that no one could defeat the dragon Glaurung. Also you keep ignoring the fact that humans never actually beat dragons one-on-one. Not to mention, dragons shattered entire armies of first age Elves.

Seems pretty clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

Dragons did turn the tide against First Age elves, which is pretty impressive considering First Age elves were badass.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Ecthelion's sheer manliness echoes through eternity, like Russel Crowe.

Tolkein couldn't even be bothered to describe Ancalagon.

In an older version, Gothmog wasn't his only Balrog kill of the day. Ecthelion is clearly a manifestation of Illuvatar in Gondolin.

Originally posted by Epicurus
I am not 100% sure, but I think that iffy sword of Balrog's could likely penetrate Smaug's armored hide. What are its best feats?

Originally posted by ares834
The "best" dragon, Ancalagon, was so big he crushed three mountains when he died... He destroys Gothmog and all the other balrogs at once.

And as I mentioned earlier, every time we have actually seen a dragon slain it isn't in a one-on-one battle. Heck, Turin, one of the great heroes of the Silmarillion, admitted he stood no chance against the dragon Glaurung in battle.

You really do have no clue do you... Fingolfin beat Melkor.. Fingolfin was elven... That is how powerful the elves were in the old world. Yet, when each of these great warriors and kings fought balrogs.. they usually always died themselves.

Shit, I don't even know why you mention Turin and Glaurung as he was killed and defeated by Turin. Yet you cite this as a reason why the dragons are more powerful than Balrogs lol. Odd. Shit Ancalago and a HOST of dragons were killed by an Elven King along with help.. but still killed.

Originally posted by Epicurus


I would say that it's breaking Gandalfs shield, granted it was destroyed in the proces, but that is the best (and only) indication we have moviewise.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
You really do have no clue do you... Fingolfin beat Melkor.. Fingolfin was elven... That is how powerful the elves were in the old world. Yet, when each of these great warriors and kings fought balrogs.. they usually always died themselves.

Fingolfin didn't beat Melkor; he wounded him several times before being squashed like a bug. It was very impressive but Melkor was already established as being weaker for becoming more earthly and was initially too afraid to even come out of his throneroom and fight the elf lord.

Originally posted by Utrigita
I would say that it's breaking Gandalfs shield, granted it was destroyed in the proces, but that is the best (and only) indication we have moviewise.
A magical barrier, or a physical shield? If the former, then it's difficult(if not impossible) to compare it penetrating Smaug's hide, seeing how magic is involved. If the latter, then how durable is Gandalf's shied?

Originally posted by Epicurus
A magical barrier, or a physical shield? If the former, then it's difficult(if not impossible) to compare it penetrating Smaug's hide, seeing how magic is involved. If the latter, then how durable is Gandalf's shied?

Magical Barrier, so it's tough to make a fair comparison to say the least. The best thing we have on Gandalfs shield is that it held back Sauron for a time.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Fingolfin didn't beat Melkor; he wounded him several times before being squashed like a bug. It was very impressive but Melkor was already established as being weaker for becoming more earthly and was initially too afraid to even come out of his throneroom and fight the elf lord.

He hadn't become as weak as you claim.. that came later when he poured out his power into various things and objects. When Fingolfin confronted him... he hadn't reached that weakened state yet. Yet, the most powerful of the Ainur and yet Elven Royalty stood up to him and wounded him forever actually. Fingolfin wasn't even a ainur or maia.. and yet he still stood up and fought him. Sure he wasn't in his most powerful state but he also wasn't as weak as he would alter become when it took an all out assault on him by all parites to take him down.

ALso why are people acting like Gandalf the grey was so weak... he battled Sauron in the latest movie. Yet it took days and days to battle the balron and finally defeat him and even then he was also killed.

I'm also unclear how ares can say Istari had no omniscience.. they clearly do. Numerous times Galfalf would predict what was going to happen before it even happened. So clearly they had some form of Omniscience or the like. Not in totality like eru obviouly but clearly had some form of it. The alrogs are of the same origin as Galdalf so clearly they are very wise beings.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
he battled Sauron in the latest movie.
And got beaten within minutes for his troubles. The Balrog on the other hand was crushed.

Crushed after days and days of battle and also died from it.

Gandalf died against Sauron? Odd really? lol

^You referred to the latest movie, where he was defeated within minutes by Sauron. Balrog on the other hand was vanquished. Balrog is vastly below Sauron's weight-class.

Actually that isn't true at all... Sauron actually was resentful of Gothmog's power and standing with Melkor. Gothmog was Melkor general in charge of his forces to protect him not Sauron. Somebody as powerful and all knowing as melkor doesn't put somebody inferior to someone else in charge of his own protection. The person put in charge was Gothmog "Lord of the Balrogs" not Sauron. Sauron was known for being crafty and savy not a warrior. So this whole notion that Balrogs are below Sauron in weight class is laughable.. VASTLY below as you claim is utterly retarded and goes against the Silm

^This is the movie version. Sauron defeated Gandalf in the movies. Balrog got crushed on the other hand. Not too difficult to grasp.

I think the point he (was?) making is that "crush" might be a bit of a strong term for a fight that lasted multiple days and ended in a double knock-out.

^Irrespective of what terms one uses here, Sauron easily defeated a being in Balrog's class within minutes. He's a whole tier above the Balrog.

Fair enough.

I think it can be difficult for people who are vested in the lore to conform to the "movie only" standards here. I know it was a problem for me when I used to participate in topics that involved Star Wars characters.

Originally posted by Epicurus
^Irrespective of what terms one uses here, Sauron easily defeated a being in Balrog's class within minutes. He's a whole tier above the Balrog.

Only problem is Balrogs aren't VASTLY below Sauron as you claim. In fact, as I pointed out... Sauron was below Gothmog in the ranks of military and battle feats. To ignore this just because it says movies only is retarded. We know for a facts thanks to the Sil that balrogs are very powerful and in fact have vastly more battle feats than Sauron. As I stated.. sauron was more like a politician not a warrior. So no, Sauron isn't vastly about a balrogs weight class.. that is bordering on retarded to even say so.

So sauron killed Gandalf?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Only problem is Balrogs aren't VASTLY below Sauron as you claim. In fact, as I pointed out... Sauron was below Gothmog in the ranks of military and battle feats. To ignore this just because it says movies only is retarded. We know for a facts thanks to the Sil that balrogs are very powerful and in fact have vastly more battle feats than Sauron. As I stated.. sauron was more like a politician not a warrior. So no, Sauron isn't vastly about a balrogs weight class.. that is bordering on retarded to even say so.

So sauron killed Gandalf?
Based on the movies they are.

He defeated and imprisoned him within minutes. Which is leagues beyond getting killed after failing to defeat the same opponent in a fight lasting several days.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
You really do have no clue do you... Fingolfin beat Melkor.. Fingolfin was elven... That is how powerful the elves were in the old world. Yet, when each of these great warriors and kings fought balrogs.. they usually always died themselves.

lol

Fingolfin did not beat Melkor. He wounded Morgoth, who at that point dispersed the majority of his power, a few times.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Shit, I don't even know why you mention Turin and Glaurung as he was killed and defeated by Turin.

Because it wasn't a fight... Turin hid in a ravine and when Glaurung was crawling above it stabbed him in the belly with what is likely the nastiest blade in ME.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Yet you cite this as a reason why the dragons are more powerful than Balrogs lol. Odd. Shit Ancalago and a HOST of dragons were killed by an Elven King along with help.. but still killed.



That "help" was the Host of Valinor (Aka heaven) and a legion of birds. He didn't fight a legion of dragons himself he had a whole massive army of elves and maiar behind him...

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
He hadn't become as weak as you claim.. that came later when he poured out his power into various things and objects. When Fingolfin confronted him... he hadn't reached that weakened state yet. Yet, the most powerful of the Ainur and yet Elven Royalty stood up to him and wounded him forever actually. Fingolfin wasn't even a ainur or maia.. and yet he still stood up and fought him. Sure he wasn't in his most powerful state but he also wasn't as weak as he would alter become when it took an all out assault on him by all parites to take him down.

You really have no clue what you are talking about do you?

At this point Melkor was but a shadow of his former power. Initially, Melkor was mightier than all the Valar combined. But, when he was confronted by the Valar at the awakening of the elves his power was so dispersed that he was weaker than either Manwe or Tulkas.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Sauron was below Gothmog in the ranks of military and battle feats.

It wasn't Gothmog who was became the master of darkness when Melkor was captured the first time...

legion of birds

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Dragons did turn the tide against First Age elves, which is pretty impressive considering First Age elves were badass.



In an older version, Gothmog wasn't his only Balrog kill of the day. Ecthelion is clearly a manifestation of Illuvatar in Gondolin.

Okay, first off.

Ecthelion committed suicide at the end of Return of the King, Ecthelion the Fountain was beat by Gothmog the Balrog - and only managed to kill him, at the cost of his own life, by plunging both himself and the Balrog Captain into the Fountain.

Turin may not be the best warrior or as durable or agile as an Elf, but he is on spot #1 for combatants of the Elves, Dwarves, and Men followed by Feanor and Fingolfin because of his sword, helmet, strength and speed. Turin is like Hercules whereas Fingolfin is like Achilles.

Ecthelion wasn't defeated by Gothmog. He was grievously wounded earlier in the battle, and attacked Gothmog just as he was about to kill Turor (who tried to fight in Ecthelion's stead, as he was already wounded and had no weapon). In the resulting scuffle, Ecthelion stabbed him with his helm and then Batman'd them both into the fountain.

By the time Gothmog met Ecthelion in combat, he was already wounded and had no weapon. Ecthelion basically held his own with his bare hands, while crippled.

Feanor was in a similar situation, granted he was armed, after killing multiple Balrogs and being ambushed by a freakin army he did not lose his weapon and he still failed to defeat Gothmog. There was no fountain for Feanor to "Batman" Gothmog into. I am supremely confident that Ecthelion would have failed without the Fountain there, and that both Feanor and Fingolfin are superior combatants to Ecthelion.

Ecthelion killed three balrogs and fought part of Gothmog's army by himself, including dragons, before retreating to the Fountain and defeating Gothmog.

...whom he impaled with his helmet.

Feanor is an utter badass (my favorite character in LotR), but I'm not sure how "Feanor was ambushed by a bunch of Balrogs and killed" is an argument for Ecthelion versus Gothmog.

Originally posted by Oneness
both Feanor and Fingolfin are superior combatants to Ecthelion.

They are. Ecthelion is still bad ass though.

Originally posted by ares834
lol

Fingolfin did not beat Melkor. He wounded Morgoth, who at that point dispersed the majority of his power, a few times.



Because it wasn't a fight... Turin hid in a ravine and when Glaurung was crawling above it stabbed him in the belly with what is likely the nastiest blade in ME.





That "help" was the Host of Valinor (Aka heaven) and a legion of birds. He didn't fight a legion of dragons himself he had a whole massive army of elves and maiar behind him...



You really have no clue what you are talking about do you?

At this point Melkor was but a shadow of his former power. Initially, Melkor was mightier than all the Valar combined. But, when he was confronted by the Valar at the awakening of the elves his power was so dispersed that he was weaker than either Manwe or Tulkas.



It wasn't Gothmog who was became the master of darkness when Melkor was captured the first time...

I said he was weaker but he was to become even weaker later on so he wasn't at his weakest point. Further, he didn't just wound him.. he permantly wounded him forever. Point is, powerful Elven people were able to compete with and kill dragons and balrogs... Difference being.. they usually died when killing a balrog but no true with dragons. No getting around that.

So him not being aware of his surroundings and being taken by surprise means what exactly? His reactions aren't the best? He doesn't have any precog like other maiar?

And? The dragons also had help from other balrogs.. orcs and host of other beasts melkor had created. So not sure why you listed a whole bunch of people on one side and failed to mention the host of others on the opposite side. Point is, he was killed and taken out.. just like usual with dragons.

Melkor put Gothmog in charge os his safety and in charge of his army... Sauron resented Gothmog and his position with Melkor. There is no getting around the fact that Melkor.. doesn't put somebody in charge of his safety and battle when they are inferior. If Sauron was stronger or more powerful he would've been put in charge. But he wasn't. Shit in most of the battles he wasn't even doing jack shit. yet, you're acting like he's some badass warrior.. he wasn't and melkor reconized it. He was a politiician and good at manipulating which is why he was put in charge of affairs.. not because he was the most powerful. Gothmog was aboev him in that regard. Maybe you should read up on the sil and post the battle feats of Sauron?

Originally posted by Epicurus
Based on the movies they are.

He defeated and imprisoned him within minutes. Which is leagues beyond getting killed after failing to defeat the same opponent in a fight lasting several days.

Sorry but you said BalrogS.. plural. If you wree only talking about the movies you would've said balrog.. but you said S.. which means you were including all of them.. which as I've shown .. Sauron wasn't VASTLY above Balrogs.. Concession accepted.

What people are also forgetting is that again Gothmog was IN CHARGE OF THE DRAGONS and other people fighting for Melkor.. Gothmog was the general. If ANY dragon was above him in power of formidability or planning.. they woud've been put in charge. They weren't.. they took orders from a balrog.