# Balrog from Lord of the Rings (part 1)



## deathbecomesus (Aug 20, 2005)

LotR the fellowship was on TV tonight, of course I had to watch some of it.
Of of my FAVORITE parts (of many) is when they encounter the Balrog in the Dwarvin mines. That is such scary an awesome and terrifying scene. 

My questions is has anyone tried to give Stats to this Balrog creature?
I think Gandolf says it is a Demon from the other world, Can anyone give me a little more info on this Balrog? Or direct me to some info?

THanks


----------



## Muck (Aug 20, 2005)




----------



## deathbecomesus (Aug 20, 2005)

HUm, what kind of reply was that


----------



## msd (Aug 20, 2005)

Isn't it a 'Balrog'?


----------



## deathbecomesus (Aug 20, 2005)

Yes you are right, Balrog is correct. Thanks for your correction


----------



## demiurge1138 (Aug 20, 2005)

The balrog in LOTR corresponds pretty much directly to D&D's balor.

Demiurge out.


----------



## Zappo (Aug 20, 2005)

deathbecomesus said:
			
		

> My questions is has anyone tried to give Stats to this Balrog creature?



For 3.5, WotC did.


----------



## Kaledor (Aug 20, 2005)

deathbecomesus said:
			
		

> My questions is has anyone tried to give Stats to this Balrog creature?
> I think Gandolf says it is a Demon from the other world, Can anyone give me a little more info on this Balrog? Or direct me to some info?




In Tolkien, the Balrog are similar in power to lesser gods.
Ea (the one supreme god) created the Valar (the gods) and the Maiar (lesser gods or demigods?)
The Balrogs are corrupted Maiar. Sauron IS a Balrog if that gives you any indication of their power --granted it's written  that he is the greatest of those that have names, but still that gives you an indication that they are more than simple demons. They are supposed to be unstoppable by mortals. Gandolf 



Spoiler



only defeats one because he's not mortal .


 -- not sure if that really needed a spoiler or not or if should be assumed that EVERYONE has seen the movies 

So, If I were to stat them out it wouldn't be too far out of the question to give them Divine Ranks (definitely less than 10... I'd probably give them about 1 or 2??) Have to give it more thought.

But definitely in appearance and attacks and special abilities, they are the Balor in the MM.
I just think that the Balor are much weaker compared to the official Balrog.


----------



## Aaron L (Aug 20, 2005)

60 hit die balor with divine rank 0 woudnt be to far off, Id say.  That'll get you the "Swords are no more use here!"  effect you'd want


----------



## John Q. Mayhem (Aug 20, 2005)

Naw, that's a bit much. Glorfindel singlehandedly killed one in the passes above Gondolin, didn't he? I think that just using balor stats'd work fine.


----------



## Aust Diamondew (Aug 20, 2005)

John Q. Mayhem said:
			
		

> Naw, that's a bit much. Glorfindel singlehandedly killed one in the passes above Gondolin, didn't he? I think that just using balor stats'd work fine.



 You forget Gandalf is a divinely powerful being as well.

But it does sound too strong to me too.  Things in LoTR just aren't as powerful as things in D&D.  But I suppose if you wanted to convert it you'd have to power it up accordingly.


----------



## John Q. Mayhem (Aug 20, 2005)

Aust Diamondew said:
			
		

> You forget Gandalf is a divinely powerful being as well.




? I wasn't talking about Gandalf.....


----------



## Hawken (Aug 20, 2005)

> Things in LoTR just aren't as powerful as things in D&D.



How did you come up with that? If that is true, then Boromir never would have been killed by that Orc at the end of the first movie. And there's plenty from all movies to draw on to disprove that statement. Ents (Treants) stepping on Orcs like they were ants. I don't remember them getting a 'squash' attack in the MM. The undead from the mountain had a 100% miss chance (none of them were destroyed or even injured by their living foes). 

If anything, things in LOTR are MORE powerful than in D&D.


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 20, 2005)

John Q. Mayhem said:
			
		

> Naw, that's a bit much. Glorfindel singlehandedly killed one in the passes above Gondolin, didn't he? I think that just using balor stats'd work fine.



A lesser god in D&D can be "killed" by mortals.  That is the Mortal can destroy the physical body but the spirit survives and will eventualy make a new body.  Can't we say this is what happen to Suron?  Glorfindel destroyed the body of a Balrog but Gandalf killed his Balrog.


----------



## RedShirtNo5 (Aug 20, 2005)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> The balrog in LOTR corresponds pretty much directly to D&D's balor.




Type VI Demon for the AD&D purists.

-RedShirt


----------



## VorpalBunny (Aug 20, 2005)

John Q. Mayhem said:
			
		

> Naw, that's a bit much. Glorfindel singlehandedly killed one in the passes above Gondolin, didn't he? I think that just using balor stats'd work fine.




Let's also not forget that Glorfindel was a Noldor from the First Age - the time of Fingolfin (who faced Morgoth one on one and managed to wound him badly enough that even when Morgoth killed him he and his orcs didn't boast of the deed) and other uber powerful elves who weren't necessarily mere mortals.

Also during the Siege of Gondolin the Balrogs were baddass enough to drive _dragons_ before them - and the dragons listened.  Since the balrogs were Maia I think a divine rank of zero is appropriate.


----------



## Endur (Aug 20, 2005)

ICE MERP made the Balrog level 60 if I remember right.

My interpretations:

So a triple strength Balor with Divine Rank 0 sounds good to me, although at that power level, everything can be modified, so even a normal Balor with 20 hit dice would make a good Balrog ... although I would advance the Monster Manual Balor to make him size Huge.

Sauron would probably have Divine Rank 5 (since he has worshippers who can cast black spells) and Melkor/Morgoth would have had Divine Rank between 15-20.

All of the Noldor from the first age have at least the Celestial template and most of them are probably EPIC level.


----------



## Klaus (Aug 20, 2005)

The Balrog, as depicted in the movie, is definitely Huge.

As for the 'swords are no use here', just slap a DR 15/epic on the beast, instead of the regular DR. And just say that Gandalf's unarmed strikes (heh) and any weapons he wields can bypass DR as if they were epic.


----------



## Orius (Aug 21, 2005)

deathbecomesus said:
			
		

> My questions is has anyone tried to give Stats to this Balrog creature?




Yes.

And then they were pulled when the Tolkien Estate threatened to sue.  At the same time, hobbits and ent were also removed from D&D.


----------



## Orius (Aug 21, 2005)

John Q. Mayhem said:
			
		

> Naw, that's a bit much. Glorfindel singlehandedly killed one in the passes above Gondolin, didn't he? I think that just using balor stats'd work fine.




Yes, but First Age Noldor are basically half-celestial elves with lots of epic levels, so it evens out.


----------



## Rackhir (Aug 22, 2005)

Creatures like the Balrog that survived into the 3rd age were also generally much dimminished or so corrupted by that time, that they were a shadow of what they had been. So while it might originally have rated something like divine rank 0, I don't think the one Gandalf encountered would have had any.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 22, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> In Tolkien, the Balrog are similar in power to lesser gods.



In Tolkien, there are no such things as "lesser gods."  There is One God, Eru, and other "powers" that are often called "angelic", of which the balrogs were a corrupted version.


			
				Kaledor said:
			
		

> Ea (the one supreme god) created the Valar (the gods) and the Maiar (lesser gods or demigods?)



No, only Ea/Eru is a god.  The others are like individualized celestials or demons, but are not godlike.


			
				Kaledor said:
			
		

> Sauron IS a Balrog if that gives you any indication of their power --granted it's written  that he is the greatest of those that have names, but still that gives you an indication that they are more than simple demons.



No, he most certainly is not.  He is also considerably more powerful than a balrog.  And yet, he was defeated by a mortal himself; Isildur did it.


			
				Kaledor said:
			
		

> They are supposed to be unstoppable by mortals. Gandolf
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There is absolutely nothing to indicate that that's why Gand*a*lf succeeded.  Especially since non-mortals have indeed been successful against powerful critters like that in the past, notably Sauron himself, who was much more powerful than any balrog.


----------



## Quasqueton (Aug 22, 2005)

I was sadly unimpressed with how the movie balrog went down (literally) so easy. The image, the build up ("a demon of the ancient world"), the sound, etc. were all quite impressive. But it didn't *do* anything, but fall off a bridge.

And folks around here poopooed the description on WotC's site of a battle against a balor demon. At least it *did* something. 

Quasqueton


----------



## Phaedrus (Aug 22, 2005)

> I was sadly unimpressed with how the movie balrog went down (literally) so easy.




Yeah... why bother giving him wings if he won't use them? Are they vestigial?


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Aug 22, 2005)

Phaedrus said:
			
		

> Yeah... why bother giving him wings if he won't use them? Are they vestigial?




Oh I wish I could find the write up someone did a few years ago showing how the battle between Gandalf and the Balrog would have played out in a D&D session - comedy gold!


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 23, 2005)

Phaedrus said:
			
		

> Yeah... why bother giving him wings if he won't use them? Are they vestigial?



Did you not see the suttle spell that Gandolf cast that weekened the Bridge and prevent the Balrog from flying.  There was a very brief flash when he cast it.  It came from the staff to the bridge.


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 23, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> No, he most certainly is not.  He is also considerably more powerful than a balrog.  And yet, he was defeated by a mortal himself; Isildur did it.



Isildur had a luckly shot at his weakness.  A weakness that Sauron placed upon himself when he put his essence in the ring.


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 23, 2005)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> Creatures like the Balrog that survived into the 3rd age were also generally much dimminished or so corrupted by that time, that they were a shadow of what they had been. So while it might originally have rated something like divine rank 0, I don't think the one Gandalf encountered would have had any.



Yup, as I translate it into D&D 3ed, a "typical" Balrog had divine rank of about 5 or 6 in the first age and lost most of that when Melkor/Morgoth was defeted (down to 0 or 1).  

Sauron, the cheif balrog, would have had divine 10 under Melkor/Morgoth and lost most of that (down to 1) untill he tricked humans into giving him their very souls to him with the rings (up to 5).  When he was seprated from the ring he lose much of it once more (back to 1).

Gandalf started with Divine 1 and was given a ring (up to 2).

The eldest of the Elf would have Divine 0, thoes whom were born in the first age.  And the Elron would gain Divine 0 from his ring.  Lady of the Woods (cannot rember name) is from the late first age (if I rember correct) and has a ring, thus having Divine 1.

The World of Middle saps divine rank from crupted Valar and Maiar and gives that to the Powerful race of the age.  Elves and a few humans in the first age, Human in the second age but Sauron tricked humans out of it.  The Third age saw Sauron loose it back to the Human and a handful of Hobbits.


----------



## Kaledor (Aug 23, 2005)

This is the third time I've tried to write this... my computer keeps eating my posts :\


			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> In Tolkien, there are no such things as "lesser gods."  There is One God, Eru, and other "powers" that are often called "angelic", of which the balrogs were a corrupted version... only Ea/Eru is a god.  The others are like individualized celestials or demons, but are not godlike.




I'd agree to the statment if we were just having a conversation about Tolkien's works. Eru/Ea is The Tolkien God - The Creator... But the question is how to translate it to D&D. The Valar are more powerful than the Solar in the MM. They have divine powers and grant powers to their "followers". And Tolkien *does* say himself that they were considered gods by Men. So if *I* were stating them up for D&D I'd give them Divine Ranks (course, that doesn't mean much, 'cause what's it matter what *I'd* do in *my* campaign  ).  But, considering that they appear similar in power to the likes of the mythical greek and roman gods AND they have Divine D&D Ranks, I think it would be good to give the Valar similar power levels.




			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> No, he most certainly is not.  He is also considerably more powerful than a balrog.  And yet, he was defeated by a mortal himself; Isildur did it.




Well first, it's not like Isildur is a "Regular Human". Being Dunedain's got to give him something special in D&D. If you don't like the celestial template idea, then I'd claim he should at least be Epic...  But then again... I'm arguing that Isildur is exceptionally powerful b/c he "killed" Sauron and Sauron has Divine Ranks, while you're using the same info to say that b/c Sauron was "killed" by Isildur they both must be weak. And really there's no solution to those two sides  I guess it depends on the power level you prefer in your game. If I give Divine Ranks to the Valar and less to the Maiar, then Isildur better be something special too. If you make the Valar Angles/Celestials in the MM, then Isildur could just be a high-level fighter. 
As for Sauron NOT being a Balrog. This is interesting. I've always infered that he was base on a small passage in the Silmarillion. In the first mention of Balrogs, it says that Melkor corrupted the Maiar. They became his servants. Among these servants was a group called the Balrogs. The next sentence says that Sauron was the greatest of Melkor's named servants. Now, *I* have always read that to simply mean that the "Evil Maiar" are the Balrogs and the strongest was called Sauron. Since there's no real distinction made between individual power levels of the Maiar.  But I'm definitely interested to hear was you're certain that's not the case (honestly, that's not sarcasm or such). 

In either case, back to the thread, the Balrogs aren't peons compared to Sauron. They are corrupted Ainur as is Sauron. So, again in terms of D&D, I would stat them with similar (though lesser) powers.


---And I'm gonna stop this post now so I don't lose it like its previous incarnations.


----------



## Klaus (Aug 23, 2005)

Seem familiar?


----------



## glass (Aug 23, 2005)

deathbecomesus said:
			
		

> My questions is has anyone tried to give Stats to this Balrog creature?



Well I guess Decipher did somewhere. Of course, they'd be stats for Coda rather than d20...  


glass.


----------



## VorpalBunny (Aug 23, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> I'm arguing that Isildur is exceptionally powerful b/c he "killed" Sauron and Sauron has Divine Ranks, while you're using the same info to say that b/c Sauron was "killed" by Isildur they both must be weak. And really there's no solution to those two sides  I guess it depends on the power level you prefer in your game. If I give Divine Ranks to the Valar and less to the Maiar, then Isildur better be something special too. If you make the Valar Angles/Celestials in the MM, then Isildur could just be a high-level fighter.




I agree the Dunedain are not "common" men and should not be lumped together with them, but Isildur got lucky - plain and simple. 



> As for Sauron NOT being a Balrog. This is interesting. I've always infered that he was base on a small passage in the Silmarillion. In the first mention of Balrogs, it says that Melkor corrupted the Maiar. They became his servants. Among these servants was a group called the Balrogs. The next sentence says that Sauron was the greatest of Melkor's named servants. Now, *I* have always read that to simply mean that the "Evil Maiar" are the Balrogs and the strongest was called Sauron. Since there's no real distinction made between individual power levels of the Maiar.  But I'm definitely interested to hear was you're certain that's not the case (honestly, that's not sarcasm or such).




The most powerful balrog in the first age was named Gothmog.  According to the Encyclopedia of Arda:

_The most powerful of all the Balrogs, one of the chief servants of Melkor, who held an authority hardly less than Sauron himself. A wily commander and fearsome fighter, Gothmog was often accompanied by others of his fiery kind, and at least in the Nirnaeth he had a personal guard of dozens of trolls. His weapon was a great black axe._

He was slain by Ecthelion of the Fountain during the Fall of Gondolin.

Sauron is most definitely not a balrog.  He was Maia (originally of Aulë , IIRC) and was *corrupted* by Melkor.  Balrogs were Maia "fire spirits" that allied themselves with Morgoth in the first age.


----------



## Kaledor (Aug 23, 2005)

VorpalBunny said:
			
		

> He was Maia (originally of Aulë , IIRC) and was *corrupted* by Melkor.  Balrogs were Maia "fire spirits" that allied themselves with Morgoth in the first age.




Okay, that was exactly what I thought. That both Sauron and the Balrogs were originally Maiar. And since there's not a whole lot of evidence that there are levels of Maia Power, that a Bolrog- and a Sauron-Maia are similar... Hmmmm. But I know the passage you're talking about where it says that Gothmog is the strongest (Lord) of the Balrogs. Since Sauron is stronger than Gothmog, Sauron can't be a Balrog. Got it.
Unless, you think about Sauron as a D&D Template that was applied to the base creature of Balrog. Meaning that once Sauron was named and became the Chief Lt of Melkor, he was no longer considered a Balrog. (This is just speculation).

But it IS safe (?) to say that a Balrog is an Evil Maia, AND Sauron is ALSO an Evil Maia. So, if you give Divine Ranks to a Maia, you may also want to give them to Sauron and the Balrogs.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> So if *I* were stating them up for D&D I'd give them Divine Ranks (course, that doesn't mean much, 'cause what's it matter what *I'd* do in *my* campaign  ).



And if *I* were doing it, they'd probably be something like the Archdevils and whatnot.  I can't remember what the Celestial equivalents to Dispater, Demogorgon and Orcus are called, but they don't have divine rank.  Sure, they've got CRs in the 30s, though.


			
				Kaledor said:
			
		

> I'm arguing that Isildur is exceptionally powerful b/c he "killed" Sauron and Sauron has Divine Ranks, while you're using the same info to say that b/c Sauron was "killed" by Isildur they both must be weak. And really there's no solution to those two sides  I guess it depends on the power level you prefer in your game.



Well, don't forget, Isildur was later killed by a handful of Joe Blow orcs who shot him with an arrow or two as he came out of the water.  That would be patently impossible for an epic level D&D character.

Really, though, all that proves is that making comparisons between LotR and D&D are probably a fruitless exercise.  I'm not trying to demonstrate that my way is better than your way, simply that neither way really captures the essence of LotR very well.


			
				Kaledor said:
			
		

> As for Sauron NOT being a Balrog. This is interesting. I've always infered that he was base on a small passage in the Silmarillion. In the first mention of Balrogs, it says that Melkor corrupted the Maiar. They became his servants. Among these servants was a group called the Balrogs. The next sentence says that Sauron was the greatest of Melkor's named servants. Now, *I* have always read that to simply mean that the "Evil Maiar" are the Balrogs and the strongest was called Sauron. Since there's no real distinction made between individual power levels of the Maiar.  But I'm definitely interested to hear was you're certain that's not the case (honestly, that's not sarcasm or such).



I didn't write this portion of the Silmarillion article on Wikipedia (although I did make some very minor edits to it for clarity) but it sums up the problems of the Silmarillion quite well.  You can, if you like, insert my name where it says "hardcore fans."


> Due to Christopher's extensive explanations of how he compiled the published work, much of The Silmarillion has been debated by the hardcore fans. Christopher's task is generally accepted as very difficult given the state of his father's texts at the time of his death: some critical texts were no longer in the Tolkien family's possession, and Christopher's task compelled him to rush through much of the material. Christopher reveals in later volumes of The History of Middle-earth many divergent ideas which do not agree with the published version. Christopher Tolkien has suggested that, had he taken more time and had access to all the texts, he might have produced a substantially different work. But he was impelled by considerable pressure and demand from his father's readers and publishers to produce something publishable as quickly as possible. One must remember this version is more a product of the son than the father.



Even before I read _The History of Middle-earth vol. X, Morgoth's Ring_ and it's article "Myths Transformed" which extensively covers Morgoth and all his servents, including Sauron the balrogs and orcs, plus their origin, I think it was pretty obvious that Sauron wasn't a balrog.  The balrogs were a discrete group, who had a distinct M.O. (shadow and flame, whips, etc.) and a distinct captain of their own (Gothmog) while Sauron was always described as Morgoth's most powerful servant (and therefore not under Gothmog), and completely unlike the balrogs in nature.  Also, when Gandalf and Legolas and the rest of the fellowship discuss the balrog in _Fellowship of the Ring_, most of that conversation would be nonsensical if Sauron were himself a balrog.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> And since there's not a whole lot of evidence that there are levels of Maia Power, that a Bolrog- and a Sauron-Maia are similar... Hmmmm.



Not a whole lot of evidence?  It's *explicitly and directly stated* many times that there are levels of Maiar power.  That Sauron was more powerful than the other spirits.  That many of the spirits attracted to Morgoth were "lesser spirits."  Even that the only real distinction between the Valar and the Maiar was power level.  Even in _The Silmarillion_, but certainly moreso in other works.

The following is one such quote, from the "Myths Transformed" article mentioned above.


			
				J.R.R. Tolkien said:
			
		

> Melkor had corrupted many spirits - some great as Sauron, or less as Balrogs. The least could have been primitive Orcs.


----------



## Rackhir (Aug 23, 2005)

TanisFrey said:
			
		

> Isildur had a luckly shot at his weakness. A weakness that Sauron placed upon himself when he put his essence in the ring.




He was also wielding what was probably one of the last great swords around, Narsil.


----------



## VorpalBunny (Aug 23, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> Hmmmm. But I know the passage you're talking about where it says that Gothmog is the strongest (Lord) of the Balrogs. Since Sauron is stronger than Gothmog, Sauron can't be a Balrog. Got it.




Dude, strength has nothing to do with it.  Sauron can't be a balrog because the balrogs were fire spirits not allied with any Valar, while Sauron was a Maia "working" for the Valar named Aulë (until Morgoth corrupted him).  Sauron was a lesser Ainur - the Balrogs weren't.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2005)

VorpalBunny said:
			
		

> Dude, strength has nothing to do with it.  Sauron can't be a balrog because the balrogs were fire spirits not allied with any Valar, while Sauron was a Maia "working" for the Valar named Aulë (until Morgoth corrupted him).  Sauron was a lesser Ainur - the Balrogs weren't.



I agree that strength had nothing to do with it, but it is very explicitly stated in many places that Sauron was a "greater" spirit (i.e., stronger?) than the balrogs.


----------



## Kaledor (Aug 23, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> And if *I* were doing it, they'd probably be something like the Archdevils and whatnot.  I can't remember what the Celestial equivalents to Dispater, Demogorgon and Orcus are called, but they don't have divine rank.  Sure, they've got CRs in the 30s, though.




I *do* like the idea of making them equivalent to Dispater and such. It would give them enough power to be utterly terrifying (which you need to be able to scare off The Fellowship), but still make them approachable in combat. The best of both power "worlds".



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Really, though, all that proves is that making comparisons between LotR and D&D are probably a fruitless exercise.  I'm not trying to demonstrate that my way is better than your way, simply that neither way really captures the essence of LotR very well.




VERY well put. But it's often a fun mental exercise to make a square peg fit into round hole? 




			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Even before I read _The History of Middle-earth vol. X, Morgoth's Ring_ and it's article "Myths Transformed" which extensively covers Morgoth and all his servents, including Sauron the balrogs and orcs, plus their origin, I think it was pretty obvious that Sauron wasn't a balrog... Also, when Gandalf and Legolas and the rest of the fellowship discuss the balrog in _Fellowship of the Ring_, most of that conversation would be nonsensical if Sauron were himself a balrog.




I have to admit to having never read that... I probably just lost a few ranks in my Geek Skill  ... I'll have to add it to my list of must-reads, it sounds very interesting. But as for the last commment. It's not necessarily a flaw in the LotR book. Since the state of Sauron had changed (no longer physical), it wouldn't be unusual to have the characters not make a connection. I'm not defending my position, b/c it seems clear that Sauron != Balrog, I just want it known that from the Sill. and LotR it's not COMPLETELY unheard of to make that connection.  Seriously, I'm not of my rocker and can comprehend the English language    

**I also never realized the circumstances of the authoring of the Silimarillion. It would it explain why the flow of the narrative is VERY segmented


----------



## Kaledor (Aug 23, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> I agree that strength had nothing to do with it, but it is very explicitly stated in many places that Sauron was a "greater" spirit (i.e., stronger?) than the balrogs.




And that's what I meant by strength (should've used a different word)...
As I was saying to VB, I understood his point to be that if Sauron was the greatest that he couldn't be a Balrog (b/c the greatest Balrog was named as Gothmog). Which is all he had said originally... JD points out a great book on the Histories of ME, which clearly states that Sauron is not Balrog. Upon seeing that, I agreed with JD. (Having never previously read that book it was news to me). ***BUT*** in the Silmarillion, it is not unreasonable to assume that (look at the only instance where the origin of both Sauron and the Balrogs is mentioned... my reprint has it on page 23)... blame that on Chris T. or myself for not having read the Histories of ME... Anyway... ignore that.  
It's not important to the original question which WAS how to stat a Balrog:

My claim being that since they are both Evil Maiar (lesser spirits/lesser gods/celestials/whatever... and no one seems to be arguing that, (yet?)), however you would stat a Maia, you should do likewise with the Balrogs and stronger (er... "greater") Lesser Spirits. Now, I like a powerful version of each. I think that since the Valar and the Maiar have qualities similar to the greek and roman gods, they should get Divine Ranks b/c D&D decided that was the case. However, I ALSO really like JD's suggestion of making them more like the named archfiends (Dispater and such) with a high CR but a fight that a character COULD win.


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 23, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Well, don't forget, Isildur was later killed by a handful of Joe Blow orcs who shot him with an arrow or two as he came out of the water.  That would be patently impossible for an epic level D&D character.
> 
> Really, though, all that proves is that making comparisons between LotR and D&D are probably a fruitless exercise.  I'm not trying to demonstrate that my way is better than your way, simply that neither way really captures the essence of LotR very well.



D&D can fit the feel of LotR if you use one of the varient rules in Unearthed Arcana.  Body points.  Basicly this changes the critical rules.  So a critical hit by pass hit points and are
applited to the character body points that are equal to Connstitiun.  When you are out of body points you are dead.  A low level orc suddenly becomes deadly with a lucky shot to a high-level character.  This rule also gives low-level character and creatures more staying power with this rule, when hit point run out additional attacks reduce the body points.  Most 1st level humans will have 8-12 body points and 2-5 hit points.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> My claim being that since they are both Evil Maiar (lesser spirits/lesser gods/celestials/whatever... and no one seems to be arguing that, (yet?)), however you would stat a Maia, you should do likewise with the Balrogs and stronger (er... "greater") Lesser Spirits.



Oddly enough, the nature of balrogs, and whether or not they really are Maiar is one of the big online controversies around them.  Here's a good essay outlining the main points of the controversy.

It's not as big as the "do balrogs have wings" controversy, but it's still interesting nonetheless.

One thing the essay does ignore, though, is the literary use of describing balrogs as "Melko[r]'s creations" might mean that he corrupted them and made them what they were, not that he literally created them.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2005)

TanisFrey said:
			
		

> D&D can fit the feel of LotR if you use one of the varient rules in Unearthed Arcana.  Body points.  Basicly this changes the critical rules.  So a critical hit by pass hit points and are
> applited to the character body points that are equal to Connstitiun.  When you are out of body points you are dead.  A low level orc suddenly becomes deadly with a lucky shot to a high-level character.  This rule also gives low-level character and creatures more staying power with this rule, when hit point run out additional attacks reduce the body points.  Most 1st level humans will have 8-12 body points and 2-5 hit points.



I'm very familiar with that, but that's only one of many, many points where D&D and LotR diverge in feel, IMO.  That would (perhaps) cover this one specific incident of a high level Isildur getting killed by a lucky shot from two orcs in the Gladden Fields marshes, but it still doesn't make D&D and LotR very close to each other.


----------



## Hrihayal (Aug 23, 2005)

quick google-fu

--> http://community.dicefreaks.com/viewtopic.php?t=1467&highlight=balrog


Balrog, Valarauka, Spirit of Fire
Large Outsider (extraplanar, evil, fire, quasi-deity)
Divine Rank: 0
HD: 21d8+210 (378 vp, 30 wp)
Initiative: +11 (+7 Dex, +4 Improved Initiative)
Speed: 40 ft. (8 squares), fly 60 (poor)
AC: 47 (+7 Dex, +10 deflection, +20 natural) touch 27, flat-footed 40
Base Attack/Grapple: +21/+38
Attack: Balrog blade +39 melee (2d6+18 +2d6 unholy +1d6 fire 17-20/+1d10 fire), or thong of fire +35 melee (1d4+13 nonlethal +3d6 fire 20/+6d6 fire)
Full Attack: Balrog blade +39/+34/+29/+24 melee (2d6+18 +2d6 unholy +1d6 fire 17-20/+1d10 fire), or thong of fire +35/+30/+25/+20 melee (1d4+13 nonlethal +3d6 fire 20/+6d6 fire)
Space/Reach: 10 ft./10 ft.
Special Attacks: Flames of Udûn, fear, spell-like abilities
Special Qualities: Immune to fire, transmutation, energy drain, ability drain, mind-affecting effects; cold and acid resistance 10; outsider traits, darkvision 60 ft.; see invisibility; DR 10/epic and good; SR 36
Saves: Fort +22, Ref +19, Will +19
Abilities: Str 36, Dex 24, Con 30, Int 20, Wis 24, Cha 30
Skills: Bluff +34 (24 ranks), Intimidate +36 (24 ranks, +2 synergy), Knowledge (arcana) +29 (24 ranks), Knowledge (dungeoneering) +29 (24 ranks), Knowledge (nature) +31 (24 ranks, +2 synergy), Knowledge (religion) +29 (24 ranks), Listen +31 (24 ranks), Sense Motive +31 (24 ranks), Spellcraft +31 (24 ranks, +2 synergy, +2 scrolls), Spot +31 (24 ranks), Survival +31 (24 ranks, +2 above ground, +2 underground), Use Magic Device +34 (24 ranks, +2 scrolls)
Feats: Improved Initiative, Quicken Spell-like Ability (fire shield), Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Combat Reflexes, Improved Critical (heavy blades)
Epic Feats: Spellcasting Harrier
Climate/Terrain: Any underground and mountain
Organization: Solitary or battalion (2d10 trolls, 5d% orcs)
Challenge Rating: 23
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Any Evil
Advancement: 22-30 HD (Large), 31-40 HD (Huge)

"Standing before you is a massive coal-black figure burning from within like an inferno. Flames writhe from cracked, obsidian skin with an unholy heat. All around the demon the ground hisses with heat and where the red light of his flames does not reach is in utter darkness, as if fallen into void."

A balrog is a demon of the ancient world, corrupt spirits still driven by the will of the Dark Enemy himself, he who shall not be named. Their bodies are dense and of various shapes, from terrbile and demonic to nearly human. Despite these variations, one constant remains: the shadows and the flames of Udûn.

Flames of Udûn (Su): All creatures within 20 feet of a balrog suffer 10 points of fire damage and 10 points of unholy damage each round on the balrog's turn, Fort save (DC 30) for half of each. Evil creatures are immune to the unholy damage. If ever submersed in water, a balrog's flames are snuffed for 2d4 rounds. A balrog without its flames is a strange creature of slimy ash and a spitting red heat from deep within.
Fear (Su): So long as a balrog's flames are not snuffed out, it creates a fear effect at a radius of 30 feet. Creatures within the area must make a Will save (DC 30) or be frightened for 1d10 rounds. A creature who passes their save against a balrog's fear aura is immune to the fear aura of that balrog for one day.
Outsider Traits: Balrogs have darkvision (60-ft. range). They cannot be raised or resurrected.
See Invisibility (Su): Balrogs cannot be tricked by simple invisibility effects and benefit from see invisibility as though cast by a 21st level sorcerer. This effect can be dispelled normally, but a balrog may reactivate it as a free action on their turn.
Balrog Blade: Balrogs carry with them their signature weapons: flaming swords. This weapon is commonly a +5 unholy Large longsword of flaming burst, but can be made from any other heavy blade. Upon a balrog's death, their blade explodes, dealing 10d8 points of slashing damage to any creatures within a 20-ft. radius, Reflex save (DC 30) for half.
Thong of Fire: Balrogs carry a many-tailed thong of white heat in their off-hand. This thong acts as a +1 Large whip of fiery blast and can be used to make and maintain grapple checks at a range of 15 ft.
A balrog can maintain a grapple check with the thong as a move action and may continue to attack with his other hand while observing normal rules for two-weapon fighting.
As a move action, the balrog may attempt to drag a grappled opponent within 10 feet, thereby enabling the balrog to make melee attacks against the opponent. This maneuver requires the balrog to make a successful opposed grapple check against the grappled opponent.
Spell-like Abilities (Sp): At will: bestow curse (DC 24), deeper darkness, doom (DC 21), fire shield (DC 25), fireball (DC 23), protection from good (DC 21), shadow walk (DC 26), unhallow, unholy aura (DC 28); 3/day: blasphemy (DC 27), fire storm (DC 28), greater shadow evocation (DC 28), meteor swarm (DC 29), shades (DC 29); 1/day: elemental swarm (fire). Caster level 21st, save DCs are Charisma-based.


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 23, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> And that's what I meant by strength (should've used a different word)...
> As I was saying to VB, I understood his point to be that if Sauron was the greatest that he couldn't be a Balrog (b/c the greatest Balrog was named as Gothmog). Which is all he had said originally... JD points out a great book on the Histories of ME, which clearly states that Sauron is not Balrog. Upon seeing that, I agreed with JD. (Having never previously read that book it was news to me). ***BUT*** in the Silmarillion, it is not unreasonable to assume that (look at the only instance where the origin of both Sauron and the Balrogs is mentioned... my reprint has it on page 23)... blame that on Chris T. or myself for not having read the Histories of ME... Anyway... ignore that.
> It's not important to the original question which WAS how to stat a Balrog:
> 
> My claim being that since they are both Evil Maiar (lesser spirits/lesser gods/celestials/whatever... and no one seems to be arguing that, (yet?)), however you would stat a Maia, you should do likewise with the Balrogs and stronger (er... "greater") Lesser Spirits. Now, I like a powerful version of each. I think that since the Valar and the Maiar have qualities similar to the greek and roman gods, they should get Divine Ranks b/c D&D decided that was the case. However, I ALSO really like JD's suggestion of making them more like the named archfiends (Dispater and such) with a high CR but a fight that a character COULD win.



Deties and Demigods book was make so that characters that were 15-20 level could take on a Divine being Avatar with a rank up to about 5.  It should be a boss level encounter that is a very tought fight, one that uses 50% or more of resorces and good posaibilaty of a death.  Giving the Balorg a divine leve of 5 or less would make it something to be feared by most of the Fellowship, but not impossable for Gandlof to kill.  Rember Gandlof, whom is a good Maiar, has been traveling middle earth for 60 human generations, about 1800 years, always riding into danger while elfs just as old sat at home.


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 23, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> I'm very familiar with that, but that's only one of many, many points where D&D and LotR diverge in feel, IMO.  That would (perhaps) cover this one specific incident of a high level Isildur getting killed by a lucky shot from two orcs in the Gladden Fields marshes, but it still doesn't make D&D and LotR very close to each other.



It makes them closer.  Beorn in the fellowship movie would be an example of someone loosing both hit points and body points.  He tried to continue to fight while wounded in body points.


----------



## Kaledor (Aug 23, 2005)

I liked the link, Joshua. It's got some great details. I especially like how it pairs different incarnations of the same passage from different release times.  Really showing, I think, how J.R.R. worked on his mythology -- that is, I know that as he has always seemed like less of a writer and more of a creator. And I remember reading in one of his biographies how his work was very fluid and developed in an oral nature.  Many of his stories were shared with his peers at the local "hangout" before being committed to writing. So, it would be completely understandable if there was a little morphing of some details as things were developed. 
I wish there was a more definative answer to the question. From what I've read, I'm sticking to the Balrog = Maiar. Tho' I really like the passage that indicates that Gothmog was once a son of Melkor. **VERY INTERESTING**   



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> It's not as big as the "do balrogs have wings" controversy, but it's still interesting nonetheless.




oooh... now that *IS* one that I have heard before.
I like the visual of the wings.    As do many artists that have depicted them to my knowledge...
But I haven't ever seen a reason for them that I remember except the "wreathed in fire" passage. Is it just that we think of demons as being Winged b/c they're fallen angles and we imagine them with wings (though that too doesn't really make sense).

Where do you stand on the wings or no wings?


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2005)

Oddly enough, I just updated my blog on balrog issues; I'd read those articles again recently and had it on my mind.


----------



## VorpalBunny (Aug 23, 2005)

Kaledor said:
			
		

> And that's what I meant by strength (should've used a different word)...
> As I was saying to VB, I understood his point to be that if Sauron was the greatest that he couldn't be a Balrog (b/c the greatest Balrog was named as Gothmog).




Ahhh.  My bad then.  I was reading "Strength" in a "my dad can beat up your dad" kind of way - not (as Joshua pointed out) in a greater/lesser spirit way.

Oh, BTW Joshua:

Read your blog - good stuff, but balrogs don't have wings.


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 23, 2005)

TanisFrey said:
			
		

> It makes them closer.  Beorn in the fellowship movie would be an example of someone loosing both hit points and body points.  He tried to continue to fight while wounded in body points.



Yep.  In my short-lived Middle-earth d20 campaign, I used VP/WP, which is almost exactly the same concept.  Among other changes.


----------



## Pseudonym (Aug 24, 2005)

Hrihayal said:
			
		

> Thong of Fire




Now there's a mental image I didn't need.


----------



## mmu1 (Aug 24, 2005)

If you want to get technical, Isildur didn't kill Sauron - except in the movie, because they wanted to squeeze it all into a short prologue...

Elendil (Isildur's father) and Gil-Galad (the king of the Elves) killed Sauron, but it cost them their lives as well.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 24, 2005)

Well in the Silmarillion it goes...
"But at the last the siege was so strait that Sauron himself came forth and he wrestled with Gil-Galad and Elendil, and they both were slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell.  But Sauron also was thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the Ruling Ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own.  Then Sauron was for that time vanquished, and he forsook his body, and his spirit fled far away and hid in waste places; and he took no visible shape again for many long years."


----------



## Steel_Wind (Aug 24, 2005)

TanisFrey said:
			
		

> Isildur had a luckly shot at his weakness.  A weakness that Sauron placed upon himself when he put his essence in the ring.




True enough. But to get real picky and the "I'll see your 10 and raise you twenty" Sauron outright surrendered to Ar Pharazon (another mortal) when his army plain peed their armor and fled the battlefield in sheer terror at the coming of the Army of Numenor.

I know I know... Sauron got the last laugh (but he still got his evil ass dragged off in chains).

Whatever the case - the Balrog of Moria is still a great CGI effect


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 24, 2005)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> If you want to get technical, Isildur didn't kill Sauron - except in the movie, because they wanted to squeeze it all into a short prologue...
> 
> Elendil (Isildur's father) and Gil-Galad (the king of the Elves) killed Sauron, but it cost them their lives as well.



Uh, no.  Technically _none_ of them "killed" Sauron, as far as I know, although it's hard to tell if he was "killed" or merely defeated.  Isildur cut of his finger and defeated him, after Sauron had killed Elendil and Gil-galad.  There's no talk of either of those killing Sauron, though.  That's completely incorrect.


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 24, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> True enough. But to get real picky and the "I'll see your 10 and raise you twenty" Sauron outright surrendered to Ar Pharazon (another mortal) when his army plain peed their armor and fled the battlefield in sheer terror at the coming of the Army of Numenor.
> 
> I know I know... Sauron got the last laugh (but he still got his evil ass dragged off in chains).
> 
> Whatever the case - the Balrog of Moria is still a great CGI effect



Sauron surrendered to an army of the Dunedain or special human, special mortals.  And without a fight so he could attack them from the inside.  He allowed the chains.

Yes, I agree based on what other posted that Sauron is not a Balrog


----------



## TanisFrey (Aug 24, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> And if *I* were doing it, they'd probably be something like the Archdevils and whatnot.  I can't remember what the Celestial equivalents to Dispater, Demogorgon and Orcus are called, but they don't have divine rank.  Sure, they've got CRs in the 30s, though.



Deties and Demigods does sugest that demons, devils, angels could have divine rank 0.  At least a limmited form of divine rank


----------



## mmu1 (Aug 24, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Uh, no.  Technically _none_ of them "killed" Sauron, as far as I know, although it's hard to tell if he was "killed" or merely defeated.  Isildur cut of his finger and defeated him, after Sauron had killed Elendil and Gil-galad.  There's no talk of either of those killing Sauron, though.  That's completely incorrect.




Fine - defeated, then...  

As for references on this, here's one from Appendix B in LotR:

3441: Sauron overethrown by Elendil and Gil-Galad, who perish. Isildur takes the One Ring. Sauron passes away and the Ringwraiths go into the shadows. The Second Age ends.

And another one  from Gandalf's conversation with Frodo when they confirm that Bilbo's ring is the One:

"It was Gil-Galad, Elven-King and Elendil of Westernesse who overthrew Sauron, though they themselves perished _in the the deed_; and Isildur Elendil's son cut the Ring from Sauron's hand and took it for his own." (emphasis mine)

I suppose it's not as definitive as saying "Elendil and Gil-Galad defeated Sauron in hand to hand combat", but to say it indicates _Isildur_ defeated Sauron is a hell of a stretch.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Aug 25, 2005)

I kind of read those references to mean that Gil-Galad and Elendil were the two lords of the hosts that battled Sauron and thus are named as having defeated him when their forces defeated him.  The leader gets the credit and all that.  But you have a point, I can see where you can read it to assume that he was defeated by those two and Isildur cut the ring from the finger of his corpse or something to that effect.


----------



## mmu1 (Aug 25, 2005)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> I kind of read those references to mean that Gil-Galad and Elendil were the two lords of the hosts that battled Sauron and thus are named as having defeated him when their forces defeated him.  The leader gets the credit and all that.  But you have a point, I can see where you can read it to assume that he was defeated by those two and Isildur cut the ring from the finger of his corpse or something to that effect.




That'd be a significant departure from the style Tolkien's work has maintained throughout, though. He was trying to follow a particular model of heroic fantasy, and it was almost always the case that his villains would be defeated due to the heroic acts / sacrifice of individuals, not armies of men. (at least directly) Think of Gandalf and Balrog, Eowyn (and Merry) and the lord of the Nazgul, Smaug and... oh, hell forgot the archer's name..., and any number of figures in the Silmarillion that defeated powerful foes in individual combat.


----------



## mojo1701 (Aug 25, 2005)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> oh, hell forgot the archer's name...




Bard.



...right?


----------



## mmu1 (Aug 27, 2005)

mojo1701 said:
			
		

> Bard.
> 
> 
> 
> ...right?




Right.


----------

