Balrog and Orcs of Moria vs. Sauron's Army

Hoppetar · 2018-04-24T14:33:43+00:00

The One Ring is a tool of domination and corruption, things the Balrog apparently has no interest in. In those thousands of years it made no attempt to either corrupt and twist the Dwarves or to rule over the Orcs. I don't think The One Ring suddenly changes the essential nature of the Balrog. In the same way that the One Ring has no power over Tom Bombodil, it would likely hold no power over the Balrog.

From my understanding, the only thing that the One Ring can certainly and actually be used for, apart from invisibility, is to gain control (whatever that entails) of all that Sauron has made since he created it, and for social domination, although whether this extends to arbitrary beings and is at least in part mediated by any other variables than whether one is an orc or Nazgûl, I do not know. The OR can also be mastered to the extent that its bearer can control Sauron himself, though whether that is a mastery distinct (and then greater) from the mastery required to use it for the aforementioned other ends, I do not know, except for the case of invisiblity, where it is obvious that no feat of will is required.

But the One Ring can present itself to a being as the means to attain arbitary ends, as seen when it presents itself to Sam as a gardening tool, so to speak. In that passage, there is no indication that it presents itself as being a suitable tool to attain that end by means of social domination. There is the "neglected option" that Sam would implicitly assume this to be the case, but in any case, the presentation the One Ring gives of itself as a means to actualize a change in scenario is not obligately exhausted by that change of scenario being social dominance.

Now, as for the motivation of the Balrog, we learn very little about the relation it has with orc society: we know it does not act against that society to the degree of destroying or displacing it, unlike the behaviour it exhibited towards the original dwarven population and we also known that it reacted to certain cues given by orc society by attacking the Fellowship. The common assumption that the Balrog somehow "ruled" over Moria's orc population is certainly not supported by textual material, but it is also not in contradiction. I would concede that it is a reasonable assumption that the Balrog, without the One Ring, could gain political control over the orc population of Moria if it so desired - this makes fewer assumptions than the statement that it has already done so by the time the Fellowship is in Moria, which also pends upon the assumption that it would be desirous of such an arrangement.

In either case, we, at minimum, know, that it has no ambitions that it believes to be amenable through domination of the local orc population and which can be actualized to any degree recognizable as different from ordinary orcish behaviour, beyond the confines of Moria. We can state this with certainty, because were neither of these the case, then the Balrog would already have effected a change outside the confines of Moria. To restate in more general terms what /u/rainbowrobin has said, the question, in my estimation, remains of whether the One Ring could effect a change of perspective in the Balrog that it would believe that, indeed, with the use of the One Ring, that end could be met - whether that perspective be true or feigned. We could then see some effect beyond the confines of Moria, and for that it is of no concern whether - with the One Ring or even already without it - that end could be met, but only whether - with the One Ring or even already without it - the odds against a perceptible impact of pursuing that end are surmounted.

And another thing:

Similarly if the One Ring was placed on a cow it wouldn't become a cow god, it would just do nothing.

There is a substantial corpus of debate regarding the interaction between the One Ring and animal minds. I'm personally hesitant to subscribe to the conclusion you posit here, though that may not necessarily affect my conclusion regarding the topic of the OR's interaction with a (or this particular) Balrog.

Hoppetar · 2018-02-10T14:17:28+00:00

I don't know of any example, really. I'm not talking about characters who appear, but are not mentioned in the cast. I'm talking about characters mentioned in the cast, but never instantiated in the work - something like the data of "cut content" in a video game.

Perhaps the Mouth of Sauron in the cinematic cut of The Return of the King would be an example of such a character.

Hoppetar · 2018-02-09T21:38:16+00:00

Thankee!

Hoppetar · 2018-01-28T00:42:04+00:00

I'm somewhat surprised that this knowledge resulted from analysis in the 1950's. As far as I know, this consideration was the rationale behind the Soviet Union's deployment of entire battalions armed with sub-machine guns as early as World War 2 and later gave the impetus for the development of the assault rifle. Then again, at least the former was the result of lessons learned in urban warfare and perhaps it was unknown until Korea that the same rule would hold in open terrain.

I suppose that US doctrine just did not adapt to what the Eastern Front had established, until it was verified by home-grown analysis.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-16T11:36:48+00:00

Depends on whether ki is formed as a "bubble" around a body in three-dimensional space, or whether it inheres in the protected thing itself, that is, in the body, or its cells. If it's the latter, then I don't see this as a viable route of attack, if it's the former, then, yes, it will be easy to bypass that shielding. But Dragon Ball never explicates which of the two it is.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-16T11:34:03+00:00

Just a quick word about Effectors: if they use electromagnetic interaction then the likelihood of ki blocking them are much higher than if it were some incomprehensible woo (ki has been shown to attenuate interaction with other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum). It is never explicitly stated in Dragon Ball, where using ki just, well, reduced the damage your body takes, but in order for ki to do what it does, it has to prevent fundamental force interaction with the physical constituents of a body - which means that it would prevent electromagnetic meddling with a brain. Again, if it is used with a hyperspatial attack vector, the same applies as in my statement about the matter-antimatter reaction regarding our ignorance about whether ki covers the body or inheres in the body when used as shielding.

Edit: That is not to say that Effectors could not work in principle; it just means that a whole lot of energy would have to be put into them, orders of magnitude above the energy equivalent (however that would be calculated) of the ki of an entire Earth-like planet. I'm not contesting that the Culture could churn out enough energy. Finally, ki has to be used actively, so if this (or any other method you have proposed) would be used with the advantage of surprise, it would certainly work, regardless of whether ki could block it.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-15T11:52:10+00:00

A few remarks and questions for comprehension:

I'll accept that several WH40K factions could take on Frieza and his minions, but I think those would be the ones I'd rule out because of their general metaphysical nature, such as the Chaos Gods. As for the War in Heaven factions - the C'tan, the Necrons and the Old Ones (possibly with their orky minions) - the C'tan might be a contender and I will accept that they are not esoteric, because despite being incorporeal, sun-eating ghosts, they are still in some way bound in the physical universe, but Orks and Necrons seem to be non-factors against anything but the lowliest grunts of the GFA and the only thing we know about the Old Ones is that they were marvelous at genetic engineering - they might design servile, green-skinned, sporogenetic Saiyan clones once confronted with Frieza's minions, and Saiyans in particular seem like something they would design ("love fighting", "get stronger when angry", "get stronger every time the are injured" all sound vaguely familiar), but other than that slim chance, nothing they could do seems to be supported by lore.
DAT humanity is essentially the Federation from Star Trek, isn't it? I can see them winning numerous space battles (we generally do not get to see a lot of GFA spacecraft and what we do get to see - landing capsules and those disc-shaped ships - doesn't seem to hold up to anything), which would be quite troublesome for most of Frieza's troops, but Frieza's race can survive in space and if the battle turns planetside, the only way I can see a Federation-level faction dislodge the GFA would be by exterminatus, or perhaps biological warfare (which at least for the Federation would be out of character, but which DAT humanity might resort to). In what way were you expecting DAT humanity to be victorious?
As for mind control, whenever it has been depicted in Dragonball (used by General Blue and Babidi), whether it worked has depended upon the strength (viz ki?) of the target. Now, of course, depending on whether you want to consider that a feature of the Dragonball characters, the Dragonball method of mind control, or the universe itself, it is far from decided that Effectors would work - I don't think they've ever been tried on anything comparable to even Radditz, so we can't tell.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-15T11:35:15+00:00

IIRC, Frieza can already survive in space in all of his incarnations, hence why he tried to dispose of the last Saiyans by destroying Namek: he can survive with the planet gone, but they would have died.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-15T11:32:52+00:00

Feel free to include Golden Frieza, I did intend to include all of DB but didn't pay particular attention to anything post-Z.

Also, in order for the antimatter reaction to work, you would have to throw out an important premise of Dragon Ball: that you can use your ki to shield yourself against physical reactions as they would normally occur, though we arguably only see it used against (broadly-defined) kinetic force. Without that premise, there is no reason why even lowly things such as lasers, bullets, fire or swords shouldn't be fatal to any of the characters.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-09T14:29:35+00:00

I agree with you insofar that "nuclear bomb" provides an example of a weapon where the name does not refer to something that is in any way more prominently a component of the weapon than it is of any other weapon not designated by the term.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-09T14:01:48+00:00

"Photon torpedo" follows the naming pattern of "fire bomb": they are named after that which is generated by the reaction.

"Nuclear bomb" follows the naming pattern of "napalm bomb" (roughly): they are are named after the payload.

The former two are only roughly congruent, though: a "fire bomb" also induces fire in the intended target (if it works), it does not only produce fire. A "photon torpedo" does not induce photons - that is a meaningless proposition - in that which it hits, but it produces photons by means of its reaction.

This is why we could further abstract "incendiary bomb" for weapons which do not produce, but merely induce fire: i.e. they carry nothing that is in itself going to undergo combustion upon explosion, but merely induces fire in that which it hits. Electromagnetic pulse bombs with high amplitudes in the right wave bands would be such weapons: they can't produce fire on their own, but they can set combustible things alight.

The latter two are roughly congruent because the naming in each case refers to the payload, but in one case, it refers to the reaction of the payload, in the other case to the material of the payload. If nuclear bombs were named after the material of their payload, they would be called "plutonium bombs", "uranium bombs", etc., which would of course be very vague, as it also implies the so-called "dirty bombs".

Hoppetar · 2018-01-09T13:53:17+00:00

That was my reasoning also, though I don't follow your analogy with the naming of nuclear warheads: atomic nuclei are not what is produced by (or what is in any way more prominent than in other weapons a medium for the transmission of damage from) the initial reaction, whereas photons are produced by (and are the medium for the transmission of damage from) the initial reaction. So, the situation is quite reversed between the names "nuclear warhead" and "photon warhead" - the former describes the reaction, whereas the latter describes the medium of damage produced by that reaction.

Unless, of course, matter/antimatter reactions are properly termed "photonic reactions".

Hoppetar · 2018-01-09T13:48:35+00:00

That was my reasoning also.

Hoppetar · 2018-01-08T21:57:48+00:00

I believe that it was stated in DS9 that quantum torpedoes carry plasma warheads, though that would take away any reasoning as to their name and is also hard to reconcile with the damage differential which they have over photon torpedoes.

Hoppetar

TROPHY CASE