Can the Basilisk fang destroy the Ring ?

Started by StealthRanger16 pages

Prove it or shut up

Originally posted by Supra
Tossing into any lava will work.

No. That's just wrong. Completely wrong.

Originally posted by Supra
Tossing into any lava will work. Who's gonna go get it? No one..

That does not destroy the Ring though, which is the implicit goal.

All that does is encase it in molten rock, rendering it impossible for Sauron's enemies to destroy him permanently. That, and he could easily summon a Balrog himself to fetch it for him, if he so wished.

Having said all that, I see no evidence that the Basilisk's fang can overcome the enchantment of the Ring. The venom never demonstrated dealing a deathblow to an enchant that strong before.

Originally posted by Firefly218
No. That's just wrong. Completely wrong.

We should give Supra a chance to back up his claim...I mean he wouldn't just lie, would he?

Re: Can the Basilisk fang destroy the Ring ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
The Basilisk fang from the Harry Potter films meets the Ring from The Lord of the Rings.

LoTR strictly states what is required to destroy the One Ring. So if you pose that something else might be able to do it, burden of proof is on you.

Prove your case, go on 🙂

Originally posted by Silent Master
We should give Supra a chance to back up his claim...I mean he wouldn't just lie, would he?

Originally posted by Supra
Tossing into any lava will work. Who's gonna go get it? No one..
Prove that statement.

Originally posted by Supra
No limits fallacy applies as always. If you think magical poison can't destroy that ring and only lava can, your smoking to much peace pipe.

I think you are thinking of it in the wrong terms. Take this example if you will....The juggernaut is invulnerable because of that pesky gem BUT if you are more powerful then Cyttorak then you can harm him. The magic protecting the ring isn't the same. There is no "over powering it". What is, just is. Nothing can harm the ring except the lava from MT Doom.

Anyways Gandalf may make mistakes but the man knows his stuff....I mean he's been around for 2,000 years.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose

😇

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Burden of proof is yours. The table is empty.

LOL. Your birthday has changed yet again. Now you're back to being 30 years old. When before you were like 31-32, and last week you were 20.

Not really hard to prove considering that the ring actually tanked on screen.

😆

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
That does not destroy the Ring though, which is the implicit goal.

All that does is encase it in molten rock, rendering it impossible for Sauron's enemies to destroy him permanently. That, and he could easily summon a Balrog himself to fetch it for him, if he so wished.

Having said all that, I see no evidence that the Basilisk's fang can overcome the enchantment of the Ring. The venom never demonstrated dealing a deathblow to an enchant that strong before.

What did the ring actually resist ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
What did the ring actually resist ?
This is actually a valid question. 👆

Just pointing this out before people look at the username saying it and immediately argue.

Originally posted by NemeBro
This is actually a valid question. 👆

Just pointing this out before people look at the username saying it and immediately argue.

I always make valid points. Always.

Originally posted by quanchi112
What did the ring actually resist ?

Sauron put the fate of his existence and his evil plans in the ring. Do you really think he would do so if the ring could be conveniently destroyed by magic/poison? The ring is considered impervious to damage.

It is explained in the books that the ring is not susceptible to dragon fire, enchanted weaponry or magic. The movies expect the audience to believe in the rings invincibility without actual resistance feats. And it is a safe assumption that the ring is impervious, considering middle earth's most respected leaders and councilors all agreed to send a fellowship to Mt. Doom to destroy the ring.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Sauron put the fate of his existence and his evil plans in the ring. Do you really think he would do so if the ring could be conveniently destroyed by magic/poison? The ring is considered impervious to damage.

It is explained in the books that the ring is not susceptible to dragon fire, enchanted weaponry or magic. The movies expect the audience to believe in the rings invincibility without actual resistance feats. And it is a safe assumption that the ring is impervious, considering middle earth's most respected leaders and councilors all agreed to send a fellowship to Mt. Doom to destroy the ring.

You avoided the question entirely with rage. Resisting a dwarfs axe or whatever isn't that convincing, sport.

Basilisk fang decimates the weak ring.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Sauron put the fate of his existence and his evil plans in the ring. Do you really think he would do so if the ring could be conveniently destroyed by magic/poison? The ring is considered impervious to damage.

It is explained in the books that the ring is not susceptible to dragon fire, enchanted weaponry or magic. The movies expect the audience to believe in the rings invincibility without actual resistance feats. And it is a safe assumption that the ring is impervious, considering middle earth's most respected leaders and councilors all agreed to send a fellowship to Mt. Doom to destroy the ring.

Now you've gone done it, inb4 quan or Supra parroting "baww no book feetz"

Though Sauron poured a majority of his power into teh ring, and he he exceeds the Basilisk in power by a large margain. Should be a case of needing to be more powerful than Sauron to destroy the Ring (at least my take on it)

The Ring clearly holds a considerable amount of power. When it was destroyed, so was Barad-dur and a huge chunk of Mordor.

Barad-dur is 1,500 meters tall in the movie. That's enormous.

Originally posted by StealthRanger
Now you've gone done it, inb4 quan or Supra parroting "baww no book feetz"

Though Sauron poured a majority of his power into teh ring, and he he exceeds the Basilisk in power by a large margain. Should be a case of needing to be more powerful than Sauron to destroy the Ring (at least my take on it)

Movie forum and no book feats.

Originally posted by quanchi112
What did the ring actually resist ?

One of Gimli's axes for a start. That got repulsed so violently it threw the guy and the pieces of his axe all over the council chambers.

And 2, it lasted several seconds against the lava of Mt Doom before finally succumbing. It lasted a hell of a lot longer than Gollum's body did.

It lasted 4,500 years on the riverbed, without tarnishing or rusting. Much more longevity than anything from HP.

Then it survived 500 years of being Gollum's cockring. *shudders*

And Gollum has a ****ing big cock.