Go
to the Last Post in this thread.
|
Isengard Troll --
A debate not a Arguement - abalrogofmorgoth
Replies [45]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
13:40].
|
|
Many of you will know me as the hater
of the Isengard Troll and with many posts about it coming down
to a simple argument I have decided to post reasons why it is
against many?s vision of Middle Earth. Please note this will
not be a ?Tolkien never said it so its not right? argument, as
some seem to point out, but using quotes from Tolkien?s books
and the Encyclopaedia of Arda to say why he implied they were
not part of the armies of the white hand.
1. Normal
Trolls
The word Troll comes from the Sindarin word
Torog and are used to described the dull and lumpish creature
which Sauron, and quite possibly Morgoth, taught them what
little they could learn to use them for their own devices of
wit and wickedness. This teaching caused trolls to gain
language of that around them, the Black Speech in the east and
the Common Tongue in the west, although both were spoken quite
crudely. Tolkien later stated that trolls were made by Morgoth
in mockery of the Ents and this forgery resulted in them
turning to stone when in sunlight.
"I am not sure
about Trolls. I think they are mere 'counterfeits', and hence
... they return to mere stone images when not in the
dark.?
J.R.R. Tolkien?s letters#153
We first
encounter trolls in the Hobbit, chapter ?Of Roast Mutton?,
where the Trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. These trolls
(Bert, Tom and William) are described as Stone-Trolls due to
this. However, there are 4 other types (not including
Olog-Hai) which Sarumon could have used; Hill, Mountain, Cave
and Snow and all these are mentioned in brief description. It
is argued by some that these races were able to withstand the
sun, mainly gathered from the following Quote;
?But
there are other sorts of Trolls beside these rather
ridiculous, if brutal, Stone-trolls, for which other origins
are suggested."
J.R.R. Tolkien?s letters#153
However
I have reason to believe that these other trolls are the
Olog-Hai. In there description in appendix F of the Lord of
the Rings Tolkien says that ?unlike the older races of the
twilight they could endure the sun.? This is specifically
about the Olog-Hai and gives two points about the nature of
the normal Trolls.
a. They were all vulnerable to
sunlight. This is gathered from the fact Tolkien specifically
mentions that they were able to withstand sunlight. Why would
he do so if only the stone trolls, one of 6 types of troll,
couldn?t withstand sunlight?
b. He says ?unlike the
older races of twilight? which implies that all the other
troll kind, and orc kind, cannot endure the
sun.
Therefore I conclude Saruman could not have used
an ordinary Troll in his armies.
But what of Olog-Hai,
they can withstand the Sun?
2. Olog-Hai.
Sauron
had use of the Olog-Hai in his armies and these great trolls
could withstand the sun?s light. Many argue that the troll in
Isengard?s army were these such trolls but let me point out
this quote from Appendix F of the Lord of the
Rings;
?But at the end of the Third age a troll race
not before seen appeared in Southern Mirkwood and
Mordor.?
and..
?Unlike the older races of the
twilight they could endure the sun so long as the will of
Sauron held sway over them?
This specifically mentions
two areas; Southern Mirkwood and Mordor, as places these
Trolls live and both these realms were dominions of Sauron,
and they need the will of Sauron to actually survive the Sun.
Both these point to the fact that Sauron had the exclusive use
of these in his army.
3. Sunlight
I have used
the issue of sunlight as may main argument in this debate as
it is the primary weakness of the troll, however many may be
asking is it an issue? Saruman?s army fought in two battles;
the Fords of Isen and Helms Deep.
a. The Battles of
the Fords of Isen.
This was fought on the fords of the
River Isen which are south of Isengard. It is implied by a
quote in Unfinished Tales (chapter The Battles of the fords of
Isen) that the first Battle occurred, or at least started, in
daylight as Theodred gained the fords as the day was waning.
The Second battle has quite clearly taken place at night as
various quotes have said.
b. Helms Deep
This was
clearly fought at night time as the book states.
It is
only dark for around 12 hours a day or similar so it must be
assumed that Saruman?s armies marched through sunlight in
order to fight therefore would a Troll susceptible to sunlight
be able to make such journey, I doubt it.
Many say that
Tolkien wished people to expand on his work and do with Middle
Earth as we do to our own myths and legend but surely in
honour of the great man we should actually change what the man
has seen in his own (possibly the definitive) vision not
replace his version. Would King Arthur be as good if he was a
giant Shrimp man?
This is intended as a debate and that
I welcome people to come and present quotes and references to
prove that an Isengard Troll is possible and let?s not forget
that at the end of the day this is intended to be a game
played as we want it to be played but remember it is set in
Tolkien?s Middle Earth.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: Isengard Troll
-- A debate not a Arguement - hewhobringsdarkness
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [5/29/2006
16:54].
|
|
I agree totaly about the Isengard
troll, however Saurman might of had a few cave trolls lurking
about to help the Orcs with heavy lifting and would have hiden
in the cave during the daytime, I do agree with you on they
would have never sent any to Helms Deep.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: Isengard Troll
-- A debate not a Arguement - MOD-Khamul Of The Nine (Steve) mailto:shammatt@hotmail.com?subject=RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement
Replies [3]. This Reply Posted
[6/1/2006 13:40].
|
|
The problem is, you're not
raising any new points here. All this stuff has been gone
through already.
You obviously don't like the Isengard
Troll. That's fine. It would be a bit weird if *everyone*
loved *every* model. Just don't buy it if you don't like it.
But please don't try and impose your own views of Middle-earth
on others. There's enough diversity in Middle-earth for us to
have our own views on things. Tolkien deliberately left a
great many details unexplained to help make the world see
"real" (real worlds don't have everything explained in
detail).
Khamul/Steve.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: Isengard
Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - abalrogofmorgoth
Replies [1]. This Reply Posted [5/29/2006
17:51].
|
|
>>
>> The problem is,
you're not raising any new points here. All this stuff has
been gone through already.
>>
>> You
obviously don't like the Isengard Troll. That's fine. It would
be a bit weird if *everyone* loved *every* model. Just don't
buy it if you don't like it. But please don't try and impose
your own views of Middle-earth on others. There's enough
diversity in Middle-earth for us to have our own views on
things. Tolkien deliberately left a great many details
unexplained to help make the world see "real" (real worlds
don't have everything explained in detail).
>>
>>
>> Khamul/Steve.
i'm not
trying to impose my views, i'm trying to debate the issue.
from what i have seen people end up turning troll talk into
welling trolling, and slagging matches.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - MOD-Khamul Of The Nine (Steve) mailto:shammatt@hotmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted
[5/29/2006 17:51].
|
|
>>
>>
>>
i'm not trying to impose my views, i'm trying to debate the
issue. from what i have seen people end up turning troll talk
into welling trolling, and slagging matches.
Sorry,
yes, I see that you did specifically say you weren't trying to
say it's "wrong". Although I have a bad feeling this thread
will end up that way though and I'll lock it if it heads that
way.
Your main argument seems to be against the issue
of sunlight though. I'm not sure this is terribly relevant,
given that there aren't any rules for Trolls in the game (e.g.
Cave Trolls) saying that they have any special problems with
sunlight.
Khamul/Steve.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: Isengard
Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - Necronjb
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
13:40].
|
|
>> You obviously don't like the
Isengard Troll. That's fine. It would be a bit weird if
*everyone* loved *every* model. Just don't buy it if you don't
like it. But please don't try and impose your own views of
Middle-earth on others. There's enough diversity in
Middle-earth for us to have our own views on things. Tolkien
deliberately left a great many details unexplained to help
make the world see "real" (real worlds don't have everything
explained in detail).
>>
>>
>>
Khamul/Steve.
I reckon that's a bit harsh Steve. He has
a view, and he is not trying to "Impose it upon others", he is
making a point, and is attempting to convince others that it
is correct, which is fine. On the other hand, YOU are trying
to prevent him from sharing his contempt and disaproval for
the IT, and are therefore "Imposing your own views of
Middle-earth on him".
And if he doesn't buy it, it
isn't going to stop him playing AGAINST it (Which is just as
bad)
James
Reply
Top |
|
Idiocy! -
morvegil
Replies [8]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
6:33].
|
|
Again the balrog has opened his mouth
with this propadanga! It is said, evne in your own quotes,
that only the stone trolls didnt suffer from
sunlight!
If light was a factor, then the trolls in
Moria would be stone from torches or all the opening's in the
wall!
Watch the scene in Balins Tomb, numerous times
the troll is in the sunlight from the various
shafts!!!!
All you have proven is that stone trolls,
which tolkein is obviously tryin to cover up, turn to stone. I
think if you delve into his letters more you will see the
quote where the Troll's were actually always statues, and that
good 'ol Bilbo made up the story for little kiddies (Wow, JUST
LIKE THE MOVIE).
The Isengard troll is a tactical fact,
Saruman WOULD have to use thes beasts to carry all the siege
gear!
As the INVENTOR of the Isengard troll, i suggest
you look at this link and go back to the drawing board with
your blasphemy of
Tolkienism!!!!!!!!!!!
http://morvegil.com/lotr/isengardtroll.htm
Reply
Top |
|
RE:
Idiocy! - abalrogofmorgoth
Replies [1]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
6:28].
|
|
ahhbut as i have also pointed out
that Tolkien specified that Olog-Hai were special and
different from the other races of troll as they were able to
withstand the sun. This implies,only implies, that all other
types of troll were unable to withstand the sun.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE:
Idiocy! - Alirox mailto:ali_lista@hotmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: Idiocy!
Replies [0].
This Reply Posted [6/1/2006 6:28].
|
|
>> ahhbut as i have also
pointed out that Tolkien specified that Olog-Hai were special
and different from the other races of troll as they were able
to withstand the sun. This implies,only implies, that all
other types of troll were unable to withstand the
sun.
Ologs were troll?!?
Reply
Top |
|
RE:
Idiocy! - sauronslefteyebrow
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [5/29/2006
19:10].
|
|
There is only one troll here
Morvegil! I don't see any need for name calling after such a
thought out and reasoned post.
There is something to be
said about those that become most defensive and object so
strongly to others views.
Personally I couldn't care less
about the Isengard Troll. Use it or not. I am just pleased to
see such a refreshing post taking time to refer to specific
Letters (and not just hinting at ones that don't actually
exist - Morvegil)
>> If light was a factor, then
the trolls in Moria would be stone from torches or all the
opening's in the wall!
Natural daylight is the issue.
'They must be below ground ... or they return to that from
which they were made.'
It is safe to say that the Troll in
Moria is 'below ground'
>> Watch the scene in
Balins Tomb, numerous times the troll is in the sunlight from
the various shafts!!!!
You see, what you have done
there is confuse Tolkien's vision, work and authority with a
movie made by a short Kiwi bloke. Yes, the gave is based on
the movie too, (always a favourite argument for those who are
wrong) but that just becomes a chicken vs egg pitched
battle.
>> I think if you delve into his letters
more you will see the quote where the Troll's were actually
always statues, and that good 'ol Bilbo made up the story for
little kiddies (Wow, JUST LIKE THE MOVIE).
I think you
have just made that up. I have read the Letters and have no
recollection of this claim. Please refer me to the specific
letter and I will gladly withdraw this remark.
>>
The Isengard troll is a tactical fact, Saruman WOULD have to
use thes beasts to carry all the siege gear!
Like the
men of Gondor had Gondorian Trolls to load their trebuchet?
The Egyptians had Egyptian Trolls to build the
pyramids?
>> As the INVENTOR of the Isengard
troll, i suggest you look at this link and go back to the
drawing board with your blasphemy of
Tolkienism!!!!!!!!!!!
So if you invented them, how come
they have always existed in your
view?
Blasphemy?......!
>>
http://morvegil.com/lotr/isengardtroll.htm
I know that
is supposed to impress me, but sorry....
Reply
Top |
|
Trolls
skin - dillpickle
Replies [2]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
6:33].
|
|
Trolls skin developed a crust if they
were exposed to sunlight for short periods of time, esp when
sleeping
Look in the weapons and warfare book
Reply
Top |
|
RE: Trolls
skin - hithero
Replies [1]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
6:33].
|
|
>> Trolls skin developed a
crust if they were exposed to sunlight for short periods of
time, esp when sleeping
>>
>> Look in the
weapons and warfare book
Please do not use THAT BOOK as
a reference source, most of the material is
invented.
Dave
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: Trolls
skin - Alirox mailto:ali_lista@hotmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: Trolls skin
Replies
[0]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006 6:33].
|
|
>> >> Trolls skin
developed a crust if they were exposed to sunlight for short
periods of time, esp when sleeping
>> >>
>> >> Look in the weapons and warfare
book
>>
>> Please do not use THAT BOOK as a
reference source, most of the material is
invented.
>>
>> Dave
I agree
I
like the pictures but try Tolkien: the illustrated
encyclopedia by david day
Reply
Top |
|
RE:
Idiocy! - Olympian
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [5/30/2006
7:06].
|
|
>> Again the balrog has opened
his mouth with this propadanga! It is said, evne in your own
quotes, that only the stone trolls didnt suffer from
sunlight!
>>
>> If light was a factor, then
the trolls in Moria would be stone from torches or all the
opening's in the wall!
>>
>> Watch the
scene in Balins Tomb, numerous times the troll is in the
sunlight from the various shafts!!!!
>>
>>
All you have proven is that stone trolls, which tolkein is
obviously tryin to cover up, turn to stone. I think if you
delve into his letters more you will see the quote where the
Troll's were actually always statues, and that good 'ol Bilbo
made up the story for little kiddies (Wow, JUST LIKE THE
MOVIE).
>>
>> The Isengard troll is a
tactical fact, Saruman WOULD have to use thes beasts to carry
all the siege gear!
>>
>> As the INVENTOR
of the Isengard troll, i suggest you look at this link and go
back to the drawing board with your blasphemy of
Tolkienism!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
http://morvegil.com/lotr/isengardtroll.htm
youre
talking about blasphemies of tolkienism, i think you need to
look up hypocrisy
Reply
Top |
|
RE:
Idiocy! - LonelyKnight
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
9:19].
|
|
>> Again the balrog has opened
his mouth with this propadanga!
unecessary
>> It is said, evne in your
own quotes, that only the stone trolls didnt suffer from
sunlight!
yes but in his opinion stone trolls embrace
every troll besides the olog-hai. You can have your own view,
just don't attack his (note i have no problem with Isengard
Trolls)
>> If light was a factor, then the trolls
in Moria would be stone from torches or all the opening's in
the wall!
They have already cleared this topic,
daylight means basicly sunlight, not torches
>>
Watch the scene in Balins Tomb, numerous times the troll is in
the sunlight from the various shafts!!!!
although it is
true that the realm of moria was completely filled with
sunlight in the days the dwarves lived there it is also true
that the goblins blocked all the passages for the light the
dwarves had built, so that's an error in the movie, there was
no daylight in moria at that time
you could say that balin
cleared the passages again but the goblins would have blocked
them again by the time the fellowship enters
moria
>> All you have proven is that stone
trolls, which tolkein is obviously tryin to cover up, turn to
stone. I think if you delve into his letters more you will see
the quote where the Troll's were actually always statues, and
that good 'ol Bilbo made up the story for little kiddies (Wow,
JUST LIKE THE MOVIE).
I've heard about this issue
before, never actually read the text, do post it.
as far as
i remenber all you could really get from that text is that the
trolls loked like statues once they turned to
stone
>> The Isengard troll is a tactical fact,
Saruman WOULD have to use thes beasts to carry all the siege
gear!
right... next you will be telling me that the
guys back in Middle age had trolls to carry their siege
gear... no comments
I NEVER read anything about these cave
trolls, they could exist IN Isengard, but there is no
reference to trolls in Helm's Deep
Reply
Top |
|
RE: Isengard Troll
-- A debate not a Arguement - DwarfMan1
Replies [2]. This Reply Posted [5/29/2006
20:48].
|
|
Nice article..er, I mean post. You
should submit that to the WD or something.
DwarfMan
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: Isengard
Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - ManofErebor
Replies [1]. This Reply Posted [5/29/2006
20:48].
|
|
To abalrogofmorgoth, I would like to
say I appreciated the thoughtful, researched argument.
My initial reaction to the Isengard troll was
negative. I also do not see how trolls would be a part of any
Isengard force, although I could see a rationale made for a
few in Isengard itself--workers in the caves or brought out at
night for patrols.
I shall reluctantly include some in
my force (I'm an addict to LOTR figures), but I shall
resist--to the extent I can--using them in any force far away
from Isengard. And I shall consider them a form of cave troll,
as I really don't see how Sauron's sun-surviving trolls could
have gotten to Sauramon (as if Sauron would
share).
Khamul/Steve is right in that there is room for
everyone to enjoy their own vision of Middle Earth. But
perhaps your argument will persuade a few folks to "the
light," and perhaps delay my inevitable
purchases.
Cordially,
Del
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - Myntokk
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [5/29/2006
20:48].
|
|
as i see it, the logical argument
against isengard trolls is sunlight, but there's no other
reason why saruman couldn't have trolls. there's also no
logical counter-argument that i can think of, that the trolls
would turn to stone is a pretty good reason why saruman
wouldn't have any. however, that's an argument against cave
trolls too. certainly every battle involving moria doesn't
take place at night or underground, and moria armies would be
unable to move during the day if they contain any trolls.
these are exactly the same problems with an isengard troll. i
think that when playing scenarios you are perfectly able to
include isengard trolls where they are feasible, and leave
them out where they are not. however, in the event of a
pitched battle i think the sunlight factor is just kind of
ignored, i wouldn't tell a moria player that he can't field
his cave troll in a point-match just because we're not
fighting underground.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: Isengard Troll
-- A debate not a Arguement - Kolokotroni
Replies [8]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
17:16].
|
|
>> Many of you will know me as
the hater of the Isengard Troll and with many posts about it
coming down to a simple argument I have decided to post
reasons why it is against many?s vision of Middle Earth.
Please note this will not be a ?Tolkien never said it so its
not right? argument, as some seem to point out, but using
quotes from Tolkien?s books and the Encyclopaedia of Arda to
say why he implied they were not part of the armies of the
white hand.
>>
>> 1. Normal
Trolls
>>
>> The word Troll comes from the
Sindarin word Torog and are used to described the dull and
lumpish creature which Sauron, and quite possibly Morgoth,
taught them what little they could learn to use them for their
own devices of wit and wickedness. This teaching caused trolls
to gain language of that around them, the Black Speech in the
east and the Common Tongue in the west, although both were
spoken quite crudely. Tolkien later stated that trolls were
made by Morgoth in mockery of the Ents and this forgery
resulted in them turning to stone when in sunlight.
>>
>> "I am not sure about Trolls. I think
they are mere 'counterfeits', and hence ... they return to
mere stone images when not in the dark.?
>> J.R.R.
Tolkien?s letters#153
>>
>> We first
encounter trolls in the Hobbit, chapter ?Of Roast Mutton?,
where the Trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. These trolls
(Bert, Tom and William) are described as Stone-Trolls due to
this. However, there are 4 other types (not including
Olog-Hai) which Sarumon could have used; Hill, Mountain, Cave
and Snow and all these are mentioned in brief description. It
is argued by some that these races were able to withstand the
sun, mainly gathered from the following Quote;
>>
>> ?But there are other sorts of Trolls beside these
rather ridiculous, if brutal, Stone-trolls, for which other
origins are suggested."
>> J.R.R. Tolkien?s
letters#153
>>
>> However I have reason to
believe that these other trolls are the Olog-Hai. In there
description in appendix F of the Lord of the Rings Tolkien
says that ?unlike the older races of the twilight they could
endure the sun.? This is specifically about the Olog-Hai and
gives two points about the nature of the normal
Trolls.
>>
>> a. They were all vulnerable
to sunlight. This is gathered from the fact Tolkien
specifically mentions that they were able to withstand
sunlight. Why would he do so if only the stone trolls, one of
6 types of troll, couldn?t withstand sunlight?
>>
>> b. He says ?unlike the older races of twilight?
which implies that all the other troll kind, and orc kind,
cannot endure the sun.
>>
>> Therefore I
conclude Saruman could not have used an ordinary Troll in his
armies.
>>
>> But what of Olog-Hai, they
can withstand the Sun?
>>
>> 2.
Olog-Hai.
>>
>> Sauron had use of the
Olog-Hai in his armies and these great trolls could withstand
the sun?s light. Many argue that the troll in Isengard?s army
were these such trolls but let me point out this quote from
Appendix F of the Lord of the Rings;
>>
>>
?But at the end of the Third age a troll race not before seen
appeared in Southern Mirkwood and Mordor.?
>>
>> and..
>>
>> ?Unlike the older
races of the twilight they could endure the sun so long as the
will of Sauron held sway over them?
>>
>>
This specifically mentions two areas; Southern Mirkwood and
Mordor, as places these Trolls live and both these realms were
dominions of Sauron, and they need the will of Sauron to
actually survive the Sun. Both these point to the fact that
Sauron had the exclusive use of these in his army.
>>
>> 3. Sunlight
>>
>> I have used
the issue of sunlight as may main argument in this debate as
it is the primary weakness of the troll, however many may be
asking is it an issue? Saruman?s army fought in two battles;
the Fords of Isen and Helms Deep.
>>
>> a.
The Battles of the Fords of Isen.
>>
>>
This was fought on the fords of the River Isen which are south
of Isengard. It is implied by a quote in Unfinished Tales
(chapter The Battles of the fords of Isen) that the first
Battle occurred, or at least started, in daylight as Theodred
gained the fords as the day was waning. The Second battle has
quite clearly taken place at night as various quotes have
said.
>>
>> b. Helms Deep
>>
>> This was clearly fought at night time as the book
states.
>>
>> It is only dark for around 12
hours a day or similar so it must be assumed that Saruman?s
armies marched through sunlight in order to fight therefore
would a Troll susceptible to sunlight be able to make such
journey, I doubt it.
>>
>> Many say that
Tolkien wished people to expand on his work and do with Middle
Earth as we do to our own myths and legend but surely in
honour of the great man we should actually change what the man
has seen in his own (possibly the definitive) vision not
replace his version. Would King Arthur be as good if he was a
giant Shrimp man?
>>
>> This is intended as
a debate and that I welcome people to come and present quotes
and references to prove that an Isengard Troll is possible and
let?s not forget that at the end of the day this is intended
to be a game played as we want it to be played but remember it
is set in Tolkien?s Middle Earth.
you have a very clear
and well thought out argument, and i dont think there was much
wrong with it except you dont actually prove what you set out
to. I would grant that any troll that was in isengard would be
vulnerable to sunlight. But the issue is a troll being
SOMEWHERE in isengards hordes does not mean it must be
EVERYWHERE in isengards horde. I dont think anyone is arguing
that there were trolls at the fords of isen, or helms deep.
But it is possible, that saruman had taken trolls into his
force and kept them in the pits of isengard, waiting for the
dark cloud of mordor to spread far enough to allow their
passage about. That is what i would use the Isengard troll to
represent if at all. If gw includes it in a helms deep
scenario then i think you have valid cause to complain, but if
it is just added to the miniature range to allow you to theme
as you wish then i dont think there is anything wrong with it.
The fact is, for all we know the troll is to be used in a
"what if" scenario where Isengard marches on to minas tirith
after defeating rohan.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: Isengard
Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - bilbobaggins11
Replies [7]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
17:16].
|
|
>> >> Many of you will
know me as the hater of the Isengard Troll and with many posts
about it coming down to a simple argument I have decided to
post reasons why it is against many?s vision of Middle Earth.
Please note this will not be a ?Tolkien never said it so its
not right? argument, as some seem to point out, but using
quotes from Tolkien?s books and the Encyclopaedia of Arda to
say why he implied they were not part of the armies of the
white hand.
>> >>
>> >> 1.
Normal Trolls
>> >>
>> >> The
word Troll comes from the Sindarin word Torog and are used to
described the dull and lumpish creature which Sauron, and
quite possibly Morgoth, taught them what little they could
learn to use them for their own devices of wit and wickedness.
This teaching caused trolls to gain language of that around
them, the Black Speech in the east and the Common Tongue in
the west, although both were spoken quite crudely. Tolkien
later stated that trolls were made by Morgoth in mockery of
the Ents and this forgery resulted in them turning to stone
when in sunlight.
>> >>
>> >>
"I am not sure about Trolls. I think they are mere
'counterfeits', and hence ... they return to mere stone images
when not in the dark.?
>> >> J.R.R. Tolkien?s
letters#153
>> >>
>> >> We
first encounter trolls in the Hobbit, chapter ?Of Roast
Mutton?, where the Trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. These
trolls (Bert, Tom and William) are described as Stone-Trolls
due to this. However, there are 4 other types (not including
Olog-Hai) which Sarumon could have used; Hill, Mountain, Cave
and Snow and all these are mentioned in brief description. It
is argued by some that these races were able to withstand the
sun, mainly gathered from the following Quote;
>>
>>
>> >> ?But there are other sorts of
Trolls beside these rather ridiculous, if brutal,
Stone-trolls, for which other origins are
suggested."
>> >> J.R.R. Tolkien?s
letters#153
>> >>
>> >> However
I have reason to believe that these other trolls are the
Olog-Hai. In there description in appendix F of the Lord of
the Rings Tolkien says that ?unlike the older races of the
twilight they could endure the sun.? This is specifically
about the Olog-Hai and gives two points about the nature of
the normal Trolls.
>> >>
>> >>
a. They were all vulnerable to sunlight. This is gathered from
the fact Tolkien specifically mentions that they were able to
withstand sunlight. Why would he do so if only the stone
trolls, one of 6 types of troll, couldn?t withstand
sunlight?
>> >>
>> >> b. He
says ?unlike the older races of twilight? which implies that
all the other troll kind, and orc kind, cannot endure the
sun.
>> >>
>> >> Therefore I
conclude Saruman could not have used an ordinary Troll in his
armies.
>> >>
>> >> But what
of Olog-Hai, they can withstand the Sun?
>> >>
>> >> 2. Olog-Hai.
>> >>
>> >> Sauron had use of the Olog-Hai in his
armies and these great trolls could withstand the sun?s light.
Many argue that the troll in Isengard?s army were these such
trolls but let me point out this quote from Appendix F of the
Lord of the Rings;
>> >>
>> >>
?But at the end of the Third age a troll race not before seen
appeared in Southern Mirkwood and Mordor.?
>>
>>
>> >> and..
>> >>
>> >> ?Unlike the older races of the twilight
they could endure the sun so long as the will of Sauron held
sway over them?
>> >>
>> >>
This specifically mentions two areas; Southern Mirkwood and
Mordor, as places these Trolls live and both these realms were
dominions of Sauron, and they need the will of Sauron to
actually survive the Sun. Both these point to the fact that
Sauron had the exclusive use of these in his army.
>>
>>
>> >> 3. Sunlight
>>
>>
>> >> I have used the issue of
sunlight as may main argument in this debate as it is the
primary weakness of the troll, however many may be asking is
it an issue? Saruman?s army fought in two battles; the Fords
of Isen and Helms Deep.
>> >>
>>
>> a. The Battles of the Fords of Isen.
>>
>>
>> >> This was fought on the fords of
the River Isen which are south of Isengard. It is implied by a
quote in Unfinished Tales (chapter The Battles of the fords of
Isen) that the first Battle occurred, or at least started, in
daylight as Theodred gained the fords as the day was waning.
The Second battle has quite clearly taken place at night as
various quotes have said.
>> >>
>>
>> b. Helms Deep
>> >>
>>
>> This was clearly fought at night time as the book
states.
>> >>
>> >> It is only
dark for around 12 hours a day or similar so it must be
assumed that Saruman?s armies marched through sunlight in
order to fight therefore would a Troll susceptible to sunlight
be able to make such journey, I doubt it.
>> >>
>> >> Many say that Tolkien wished people to
expand on his work and do with Middle Earth as we do to our
own myths and legend but surely in honour of the great man we
should actually change what the man has seen in his own
(possibly the definitive) vision not replace his version.
Would King Arthur be as good if he was a giant Shrimp
man?
>> >>
>> >> This is
intended as a debate and that I welcome people to come and
present quotes and references to prove that an Isengard Troll
is possible and let?s not forget that at the end of the day
this is intended to be a game played as we want it to be
played but remember it is set in Tolkien?s Middle
Earth.
>>
>> you have a very clear and well
thought out argument, and i dont think there was much wrong
with it except you dont actually prove what you set out to. I
would grant that any troll that was in isengard would be
vulnerable to sunlight. But the issue is a troll being
SOMEWHERE in isengards hordes does not mean it must be
EVERYWHERE in isengards horde. I dont think anyone is arguing
that there were trolls at the fords of isen, or helms deep.
But it is possible, that saruman had taken trolls into his
force and kept them in the pits of isengard, waiting for the
dark cloud of mordor to spread far enough to allow their
passage about. That is what i would use the Isengard troll to
represent if at all. If gw includes it in a helms deep
scenario then i think you have valid cause to complain, but if
it is just added to the miniature range to allow you to theme
as you wish then i dont think there is anything wrong with it.
The fact is, for all we know the troll is to be used in a
"what if" scenario where Isengard marches on to minas tirith
after defeating rohan.
In the book it says that the
dark cloud of mordor was seen by theoden and co. when they
were riding to helms deep BEFORE the battle of helms deep so
its perfectly possible that isnegard trolls DID come into
sarumans use before his fall
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
Kolokotroni
Replies [6]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
17:16].
|
|
>> >> >> Many of
you will know me as the hater of the Isengard Troll and with
many posts about it coming down to a simple argument I have
decided to post reasons why it is against many?s vision of
Middle Earth. Please note this will not be a ?Tolkien never
said it so its not right? argument, as some seem to point out,
but using quotes from Tolkien?s books and the Encyclopaedia of
Arda to say why he implied they were not part of the armies of
the white hand.
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> 1. Normal Trolls
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> The word Troll comes
from the Sindarin word Torog and are used to described the
dull and lumpish creature which Sauron, and quite possibly
Morgoth, taught them what little they could learn to use them
for their own devices of wit and wickedness. This teaching
caused trolls to gain language of that around them, the Black
Speech in the east and the Common Tongue in the west, although
both were spoken quite crudely. Tolkien later stated that
trolls were made by Morgoth in mockery of the Ents and this
forgery resulted in them turning to stone when in sunlight.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
"I am not sure about Trolls. I think they are mere
'counterfeits', and hence ... they return to mere stone images
when not in the dark.?
>> >> >> J.R.R.
Tolkien?s letters#153
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We first encounter trolls in
the Hobbit, chapter ?Of Roast Mutton?, where the Trolls turn
to stone in the sunlight. These trolls (Bert, Tom and William)
are described as Stone-Trolls due to this. However, there are
4 other types (not including Olog-Hai) which Sarumon could
have used; Hill, Mountain, Cave and Snow and all these are
mentioned in brief description. It is argued by some that
these races were able to withstand the sun, mainly gathered
from the following Quote;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ?But there are other sorts of
Trolls beside these rather ridiculous, if brutal,
Stone-trolls, for which other origins are
suggested."
>> >> >> J.R.R. Tolkien?s
letters#153
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> However I have reason to believe that these
other trolls are the Olog-Hai. In there description in
appendix F of the Lord of the Rings Tolkien says that ?unlike
the older races of the twilight they could endure the sun.?
This is specifically about the Olog-Hai and gives two points
about the nature of the normal Trolls.
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> a. They were all
vulnerable to sunlight. This is gathered from the fact Tolkien
specifically mentions that they were able to withstand
sunlight. Why would he do so if only the stone trolls, one of
6 types of troll, couldn?t withstand sunlight?
>>
>> >>
>> >> >> b. He says
?unlike the older races of twilight? which implies that all
the other troll kind, and orc kind, cannot endure the
sun.
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> Therefore I conclude Saruman could not have used an
ordinary Troll in his armies.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But what of Olog-Hai, they can
withstand the Sun?
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> 2. Olog-Hai.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sauron had use of the Olog-Hai
in his armies and these great trolls could withstand the sun?s
light. Many argue that the troll in Isengard?s army were these
such trolls but let me point out this quote from Appendix F of
the Lord of the Rings;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ?But at the end of the Third
age a troll race not before seen appeared in Southern Mirkwood
and Mordor.?
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> and..
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ?Unlike the older races of the
twilight they could endure the sun so long as the will of
Sauron held sway over them?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This specifically mentions two
areas; Southern Mirkwood and Mordor, as places these Trolls
live and both these realms were dominions of Sauron, and they
need the will of Sauron to actually survive the Sun. Both
these point to the fact that Sauron had the exclusive use of
these in his army.
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> 3. Sunlight
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I have used the issue of
sunlight as may main argument in this debate as it is the
primary weakness of the troll, however many may be asking is
it an issue? Saruman?s army fought in two battles; the Fords
of Isen and Helms Deep.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> a. The Battles of the Fords of
Isen.
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> This was fought on the fords of the River Isen which
are south of Isengard. It is implied by a quote in Unfinished
Tales (chapter The Battles of the fords of Isen) that the
first Battle occurred, or at least started, in daylight as
Theodred gained the fords as the day was waning. The Second
battle has quite clearly taken place at night as various
quotes have said.
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> b. Helms Deep
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This was clearly fought at
night time as the book states.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is only dark for around 12
hours a day or similar so it must be assumed that Saruman?s
armies marched through sunlight in order to fight therefore
would a Troll susceptible to sunlight be able to make such
journey, I doubt it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Many say that Tolkien wished
people to expand on his work and do with Middle Earth as we do
to our own myths and legend but surely in honour of the great
man we should actually change what the man has seen in his own
(possibly the definitive) vision not replace his version.
Would King Arthur be as good if he was a giant Shrimp
man?
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> This is intended as a debate and that I welcome
people to come and present quotes and references to prove that
an Isengard Troll is possible and let?s not forget that at the
end of the day this is intended to be a game played as we want
it to be played but remember it is set in Tolkien?s Middle
Earth.
>> >>
>> >> you have a
very clear and well thought out argument, and i dont think
there was much wrong with it except you dont actually prove
what you set out to. I would grant that any troll that was in
isengard would be vulnerable to sunlight. But the issue is a
troll being SOMEWHERE in isengards hordes does not mean it
must be EVERYWHERE in isengards horde. I dont think anyone is
arguing that there were trolls at the fords of isen, or helms
deep. But it is possible, that saruman had taken trolls into
his force and kept them in the pits of isengard, waiting for
the dark cloud of mordor to spread far enough to allow their
passage about. That is what i would use the Isengard troll to
represent if at all. If gw includes it in a helms deep
scenario then i think you have valid cause to complain, but if
it is just added to the miniature range to allow you to theme
as you wish then i dont think there is anything wrong with it.
The fact is, for all we know the troll is to be used in a
"what if" scenario where Isengard marches on to minas tirith
after defeating rohan.
>>
>> In the book it
says that the dark cloud of mordor was seen by theoden and co.
when they were riding to helms deep BEFORE the battle of helms
deep so its perfectly possible that isnegard trolls DID come
into sarumans use before his fall
It was seen but it
hadnt arrived, but that isnt really that important, all I was
saying is they could have been there, and waiting for it.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
servantofthewhitehand
Replies [5]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
17:16].
|
|
Correct me if Im wrong but in the
Hobbit didnt the goblins wait until it was dark before
searching for Bilbo and the Dwarves. Also didnt the bat cloud
block out the sun allowing the goblins to march to the Battle
of the five amries without wilting in the sun. Yet in the LOTR
game that we all play there are no rules for Moria goblins
only coming out at night and the same is with the trolls. I
dont really know where im going with this, can someone help me
out?
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
MOD-Khamul Of The Nine (Steve)
mailto:shammatt@hotmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement
Replies [4].
This Reply Posted [5/31/2006 17:16].
|
|
>> Correct me if Im wrong but
in the Hobbit didnt the goblins wait until it was dark before
searching for Bilbo and the Dwarves. Also didnt the bat cloud
block out the sun allowing the goblins to march to the Battle
of the five amries without wilting in the sun. Yet in the LOTR
game that we all play there are no rules for Moria goblins
only coming out at night and the same is with the trolls. I
dont really know where im going with this, can someone help me
out?
You're right, typically details such as this are
ignored in the game, e.g. currently Cave Trolls don't have any
special rules for them not being able to fight in the open.
Morgevil has also made a good point about the sunlight in
Balin's Tomb not affecting the Cave Troll.
Of course
you can always add rules to the game for fun, e.g. a scenario
where you have to try and survive for so many turns until the
sun comes up (maybe you roll dice each turn to check ?) and
the Trolls turn to stone.
However, most people don't
seem to have a problem using Cave Trolls in outdoor scenarios
as far as I'm aware, so I don't really see the sunlight
argument as far as gameplay goes.
Khamul/Steve.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
mastermatthew
Replies [2]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
17:16].
|
|
I don't mind the troll being
unthemed. It's that uruks are already over-powered without
trolls that bothers me. But because there are so many uruk
players no-one will listen ti me
:(
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement - Kolokotroni
Replies [1]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
17:16].
|
|
>> I don't mind the troll being
unthemed. It's that uruks are already over-powered without
trolls that bothers me. But because there are so many uruk
players no-one will listen ti me
>> :(
the
troll wont add to their power, if anything it will be harmful
to the uruk force. Uruks rely on densly packed formations, the
isengard troll is on the same size base as the mordor troll,
that means in the space where 9 uruks would have fit, only 3
attacks from a troll would have. A troll is vulnerable to
cavalry charges on the line as well. Where as normally if the
pike block is not outflanked a single horse will have to face
6 uruk attacks (only one horse base can fit per 2 infantry
bases) leaving the uruks with a considerable advantage, 2-6
attacks and uruks wounding on a 5 while the horse will
probably have to wound on a 6. A troll on the other hand is
far less dense. The troll base is wide enough for at least 2
horsmen to fit on it. So on a cavalry charge the troll will
face 4 attacks to its own 3, leaving it at a disadvantage, and
if killed would leave a huge gap in the uruk line.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement - MOD-Khamul Of The
Nine (Steve) mailto:shammatt@hotmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement
Replies [0].
This Reply Posted [5/31/2006 17:16].
|
|
>> >> I don't mind the
troll being unthemed. It's that uruks are already over-powered
without trolls that bothers me. But because there are so many
uruk players no-one will listen ti me
>> >>
:(
>>
>> the troll wont add to their power,
if anything it will be harmful to the uruk force.
Yep,
I agree, and I'm not alone in having said so before. I'm sure
that those who are worried about the Isengard Troll somehow
over-powering Isengard forces will find the opposite to be
true, an expensive model will greatly reduce the numbers of
their Uruks, and make the force much harder to
use.
Khamul/Steve.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
morvegil
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [5/31/2006
11:47].
|
|
>> >> Correct me if Im
wrong but in the Hobbit didnt the goblins wait until it was
dark before searching for Bilbo and the Dwarves. Also didnt
the bat cloud block out the sun allowing the goblins to march
to the Battle of the five amries without wilting in the sun.
Yet in the LOTR game that we all play there are no rules for
Moria goblins only coming out at night and the same is with
the trolls. I dont really know where im going with this, can
someone help me out?
>>
>> You're right,
typically details such as this are ignored in the game, e.g.
currently Cave Trolls don't have any special rules for them
not being able to fight in the open. Morgevil has also made a
good point about the sunlight in Balin's Tomb not affecting
the Cave Troll.
>>
>> Of course you can
always add rules to the game for fun, e.g. a scenario where
you have to try and survive for so many turns until the sun
comes up (maybe you roll dice each turn to check ?) and the
Trolls turn to stone.
>>
>> However, most
people don't seem to have a problem using Cave Trolls in
outdoor scenarios as far as I'm aware, so I don't really see
the sunlight argument as far as gameplay goes.
>>
>>
>> Khamul/Steve.
Yes, and in
arguement, no one ever gives penalties for shooting bows in
moria scenrios into the dark...etc...
Reply
Top |
|
RE: Isengard Troll
-- A debate not a Arguement - Alirox mailto:ali_lista@hotmail.com?subject=RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement
Replies [18]. This Reply Posted
[6/1/2006 13:23].
|
|
>> Many of you will know me as
the hater of the Isengard Troll and with many posts about it
coming down to a simple argument I have decided to post
reasons why it is against many?s vision of Middle Earth.
Please note this will not be a ?Tolkien never said it so its
not right? argument, as some seem to point out, but using
quotes from Tolkien?s books and the Encyclopaedia of Arda to
say why he implied they were not part of the armies of the
white hand.
>>
>> 1. Normal
Trolls
>>
>> The word Troll comes from the
Sindarin word Torog and are used to described the dull and
lumpish creature which Sauron, and quite possibly Morgoth,
taught them what little they could learn to use them for their
own devices of wit and wickedness. This teaching caused trolls
to gain language of that around them, the Black Speech in the
east and the Common Tongue in the west, although both were
spoken quite crudely. Tolkien later stated that trolls were
made by Morgoth in mockery of the Ents and this forgery
resulted in them turning to stone when in sunlight.
>>
>> "I am not sure about Trolls. I think
they are mere 'counterfeits', and hence ... they return to
mere stone images when not in the dark.?
>> J.R.R.
Tolkien?s letters#153
>>
>> We first
encounter trolls in the Hobbit, chapter ?Of Roast Mutton?,
where the Trolls turn to stone in the sunlight. These trolls
(Bert, Tom and William) are described as Stone-Trolls due to
this. However, there are 4 other types (not including
Olog-Hai) which Sarumon could have used; Hill, Mountain, Cave
and Snow and all these are mentioned in brief description. It
is argued by some that these races were able to withstand the
sun, mainly gathered from the following Quote;
>>
>> ?But there are other sorts of Trolls beside these
rather ridiculous, if brutal, Stone-trolls, for which other
origins are suggested."
>> J.R.R. Tolkien?s
letters#153
>>
>> However I have reason to
believe that these other trolls are the Olog-Hai. In there
description in appendix F of the Lord of the Rings Tolkien
says that ?unlike the older races of the twilight they could
endure the sun.? This is specifically about the Olog-Hai and
gives two points about the nature of the normal
Trolls.
>>
>> a. They were all vulnerable
to sunlight. This is gathered from the fact Tolkien
specifically mentions that they were able to withstand
sunlight. Why would he do so if only the stone trolls, one of
6 types of troll, couldn?t withstand sunlight?
>>
>> b. He says ?unlike the older races of twilight?
which implies that all the other troll kind, and orc kind,
cannot endure the sun.
>>
>> Therefore I
conclude Saruman could not have used an ordinary Troll in his
armies.
>>
>> But what of Olog-Hai, they
can withstand the Sun?
>>
>> 2.
Olog-Hai.
>>
>> Sauron had use of the
Olog-Hai in his armies and these great trolls could withstand
the sun?s light. Many argue that the troll in Isengard?s army
were these such trolls but let me point out this quote from
Appendix F of the Lord of the Rings;
>>
>>
?But at the end of the Third age a troll race not before seen
appeared in Southern Mirkwood and Mordor.?
>>
>> and..
>>
>> ?Unlike the older
races of the twilight they could endure the sun so long as the
will of Sauron held sway over them?
>>
>>
This specifically mentions two areas; Southern Mirkwood and
Mordor, as places these Trolls live and both these realms were
dominions of Sauron, and they need the will of Sauron to
actually survive the Sun. Both these point to the fact that
Sauron had the exclusive use of these in his army.
>>
>> 3. Sunlight
>>
>> I have used
the issue of sunlight as may main argument in this debate as
it is the primary weakness of the troll, however many may be
asking is it an issue? Saruman?s army fought in two battles;
the Fords of Isen and Helms Deep.
>>
>> a.
The Battles of the Fords of Isen.
>>
>>
This was fought on the fords of the River Isen which are south
of Isengard. It is implied by a quote in Unfinished Tales
(chapter The Battles of the fords of Isen) that the first
Battle occurred, or at least started, in daylight as Theodred
gained the fords as the day was waning. The Second battle has
quite clearly taken place at night as various quotes have
said.
>>
>> b. Helms Deep
>>
>> This was clearly fought at night time as the book
states.
>>
>> It is only dark for around 12
hours a day or similar so it must be assumed that Saruman?s
armies marched through sunlight in order to fight therefore
would a Troll susceptible to sunlight be able to make such
journey, I doubt it.
>>
>> Many say that
Tolkien wished people to expand on his work and do with Middle
Earth as we do to our own myths and legend but surely in
honour of the great man we should actually change what the man
has seen in his own (possibly the definitive) vision not
replace his version. Would King Arthur be as good if he was a
giant Shrimp man?
>>
>> This is intended as
a debate and that I welcome people to come and present quotes
and references to prove that an Isengard Troll is possible and
let?s not forget that at the end of the day this is intended
to be a game played as we want it to be played but remember it
is set in Tolkien?s Middle Earth.
Tolkien didnt say
exactly what everything has to look like. I mean, he drew
several different White trees and left it open for anyone to
design more. The isengard troll is a cool idea and it looks
good. There is also proof that he used cave trolls (saruman
that is, not tolkien) in Fangorn Forest. The ents go on about
hating the orcs especially the big lumbering ones that knaw at
the higher trees, half-naked. (that is either a troll or Homer
Simpson and he wasnt around when tolkien wrote the books.) Get
Tolkien: the illustrated Encyclopedia by DAVID DAY and look
the matter up.
So as to make this debatable, does
anyone think there should be a scenario-making competition? I
think it would be a good idea perhaps with the prize being the
models used in the scenario (already painted so you can do a
battle report and send it back)
Good Idea?
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: Isengard
Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - Grimhelm mailto:grimhelm@gmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement
Replies [17]. This Reply Posted
[6/1/2006 13:23].
|
|
>> There is also proof that he
used cave trolls (saruman that is, not tolkien) in Fangorn
Forest. The ents go on about hating the orcs especially the
big lumbering ones that knaw at the higher trees,
half-naked.
An interesting point, but that doesn't
necessarily equate to Trolls in the army, as I will outline in
a moment.
Firstly, Abalrogofmorgoth, that has to be the
best laid-out debate I've seen since I discussed the identity
of the Variags when GW released them. However, you're all
missing the biggest point. It may or may not be tactical to
have a Troll run amok at Helms Deep, but it's certainly not
very strategic. Think about it from an economic
perspective:
1) TIME AND RESOURCES
Saruman has
to armour 10,000 Uruk-hai. That takes a huge amount of time
and resources - in fact it would have halted completely if he
had only used the wood in Isengard and not moved into Fangorn
Forest. If he is trying to catch the Rohirrim at their
weakest, he needs to have his army ready quickly. Rohan has
10,000 riders if it is given the time to muster them, but
because Saruman forced them to prepare quickly, they only had
about 2,000 at the Battle of the Hornburg. With such short
time, an Isengard Troll (considerably larger than an Uruk)
would require quite a bit of investment of time and resources,
which are needed already for the Uruk-hai. Therefore, arming a
Troll for war is in fact counter-productive for the wider war
strategy.
By extension:
2) SKILL AND
INVESTMENT
The Orcs of Isengard are largely unskilled, and
only trained in manufacturing Uruk-hai armour. Saruman would
need to waste even more time in showing the Orcs how to make
the much larger Troll armour. Furthermore, they would probably
do a poor job, and there is the risk to the "employees". Look
at how in the film Lurtz killed one of the Orcs at work. In
the books, the Uruk-hai viewed the Orcs as inferior, and were
very cruel to them. Imagine how an Isengard Troll would treat
the Orcs - not very good for Saruman's employee relations, let
alone the war effort as a whole.
The Solution is:
3)
WORKFORCE
Saruman needs the Troll's abilities elsewhere. He
can't afford to fully arm a troll, but he can speed up
production immensely if he has the Troll working in the pits
arming the rest of his army. A Troll's strength would be a
huge asset in the running of the machinery in the forges, and
the amount of Uruk-hai he could churn out with one Troll are
much more than the Trolls he could churn out with many
Uruk-hai. To Alirox's point, this would explain the
possibility of Trolls working in Fangorn Forest - off the
battlefield, it should be noted.
This, of course, leads us
to:
4) TACTICS
As has already been mentioned, from a
strategic and economic viewpoint, Trolls in the army would be
unviable, but would be very useful in the workforce. The
"Fighting Uruk-hai" are already the pinnacle of Isengard's
achievements and the deadliest force in Middle-earth without a
Troll as back-up. A Troll would be an obvious target for any
army, as it is so huge. At Helm's Deep, the Elves (film) or
Rohirrim (books) would shoot it down long before it even
reached the walls. At the Fords of the Isen, the riders could
easily avoid the lumbering giant long enough to bring it down.
An army of Trolls might work, but that would, again, be far
too expensive and unable to avoid Tolkien's
mention.
There you have it, I've done the
impossible. I've proven a point regarding the works of Tolkien
using logic, logistics and economics. Hopefully, I've been
able to explain this side of the debate without Tolkien purism
or even saying the game will be unbalanced (these two
arguements are valid, but almost cliche at this
point).
To lighten up the arguement, have some more of
the works of Tolkien from an economic perspective (sorry,
couldn't
resist):
https://www.angelfire.com/rings/firstwarofthering/Humour/Chronicle.html
QED,
E&OE
-Grimhelm
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
mordorcheiften
Replies [4]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
10:35].
|
|
I was just about to say
that.
Saurman had hardly any metal in isenguard and i'm
pretty sure he wouldn't waste large amounts on a troll which
would get hit pretty fast in the battle of helms deep it would
have done no good as it couldn't climb the ladders and it
wouldn't have made it up the ramp
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - hithero
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
2:59].
|
|
>> I was just about to say
that.
>>
>> Saurman had hardly any metal in
isenguard.
Eh? Whats your source of information? Did
you not see the armouries and furnaces underground and the
10x1000's of sets of weapons and armour made for the
Uruk-hai?
Dave
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
LonelyKnight
Replies [2]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
10:35].
|
|
>> Saurman had hardly any metal
in isenguard
...
ROFL
LMAO
LOL
IMO an
army with 10000 warriors with armour requires a lot of metal,
so if Saruman had hardly any metal in isenguard then he
wouldn't have been able to arm all those uruk-hai
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
mordorcheiften
Replies [1]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
10:35].
|
|
>> >> Saurman had hardly
any metal in isenguard
>>
>>
...
>> ROFL
>> LMAO
>>
LOL
>>
>> IMO an army with 10000 warriors
with armour requires a lot of metal, so if Saruman had hardly
any metal in isenguard then he wouldn't have been able to arm
all those uruk-hai
What I meant was he hard hardly
anything to spare he was a relativly new empire and didn't
have much time to collect metal so it would have been nearly
impossible to arm those trolls fully
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
Grimhelm mailto:grimhelm@gmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement
Replies [0].
This Reply Posted [6/1/2006 10:35].
|
|
>> >> >> Saurman
had hardly any metal in isenguard
>> >>
>> >> ...
>> >>
ROFL
>> >> LMAO
>> >>
LOL
>> >>
>> >> IMO an army
with 10000 warriors with armour requires a lot of metal, so if
Saruman had hardly any metal in isenguard then he wouldn't
have been able to arm all those uruk-hai
>>
>>
>> What I meant was he hard hardly
anything to spare he was a relativly new empire and didn't
have much time to collect metal so it would have been nearly
impossible to arm those trolls fully.
Thank you.
Someone who understands my points and agrees. Saruman had
trouble getting the trees for the forges at first, before he
switched to Fangorn Forest, and iron would be harder to come
by than wood (and considerably more expensive - hence the
economics of it). The biggest factor, though, is time. He
could have got the resources for Trolls given the time, but it
wouldn't be long before the Ents, the hourns or the Rohirrim
were fully mustered if he tarried too long. The Battle of the
Fords of the Isen was a surprise attack - he couldn't have
managed that if he wasted his resources on Trolls before
building up a strong core of Uruk-hai.
Mordor had had
centuries to develop a small, but powerful, number of Trolls,
but even Sauron knew his strength was in the huge numbers of
Orcs behind the Mountains of Shadow. Saruman didn't have that
time, and "perfected" Uruks were more
important.
-Grimhelm
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
Turtlejoshua
Replies [4]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
10:18].
|
|
>> 2) SKILL AND
INVESTMENT
>> The Orcs of Isengard are largely
unskilled, and only trained in manufacturing Uruk-hai armour.
Saruman would need to waste even more time in showing the Orcs
how to make the much larger Troll armour. Furthermore, they
would probably do a poor job, and there is the risk to the
"employees". Look at how in the film Lurtz killed one of the
Orcs at work. In the books, the Uruk-hai viewed the Orcs as
inferior, and were very cruel to them. Imagine how an Isengard
Troll would treat the Orcs - not very good for Saruman's
employee relations, let alone the war effort as a
whole.
Trolls and Uruk-Hai are different. If trolls
had views on Orcs, they wouldn't be doing as they say. Only
the chieftains are the ones with some intelligence. Uruks
however were bred to be able to think, and take orders.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
LorienGuardian
Replies [3]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
10:18].
|
|
>>
>> >> 2)
SKILL AND INVESTMENT
>> >> The Orcs of Isengard
are largely unskilled, and only trained in manufacturing
Uruk-hai armour. Saruman would need to waste even more time in
showing the Orcs how to make the much larger Troll armour.
Furthermore, they would probably do a poor job, and there is
the risk to the "employees". Look at how in the film Lurtz
killed one of the Orcs at work. In the books, the Uruk-hai
viewed the Orcs as inferior, and were very cruel to them.
Imagine how an Isengard Troll would treat the Orcs - not very
good for Saruman's employee relations, let alone the war
effort as a whole.
>>
>>
>>
Trolls and Uruk-Hai are different. If trolls had views on
Orcs, they wouldn't be doing as they say. Only the chieftains
are the ones with some intelligence. Uruks however were bred
to be able to think, and take orders.
I think that the
trolls are like the child-soldiers in somalia they just do as
they're told so if Saruman with his high powerful voice that
can reach the mountain caradhras in a storm, called out to
them they would naturally come and fight for him.
The
troll would go down to the armoury and ask to get a bigger
size of armour and due to the waiting time it didn't appear at
helm's deep. When the ents came the troll didn't come up from
the cave scared of sunlight and ultimatively died.
But
what if the Uruks had won the fight at Helm's deep and Saruman
had let the troll in on the secret that it didn't turn into
stone at daylight and then it went into war.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
mastermatthew
Replies [2]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
10:18].
|
|
lol that link was funny:)
I'm not
sure about the resources - there sure were a lot of uruk-high
at helms deep...
Khamul, my problem was this: Uruks
already have
1)pikes (a huge advantage on spears like most
armies have)
2)cross-bows (best ype of bows in the
game)
3)beserkers (one of only non hero units with 2
atacks)
4)strength 5 captains (enough said)
5)wargs that
can fight without riders
6)ability to use warg or rider
stats
7)and now trolls! surely for an army without cavalry
this would spell doom! used with uruk high that is a huge
number of attacks and high fight values - they have more
options than several other armies put together - and a pike
block with a troll on each flank would make an army invincible
almost - the only advantage of being able to cavalry the sides
would be gone - and a trolls high fight value would win most
battles anyway...
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
morvegil
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
9:52].
|
|
>> lol that link was funny:)
>> I'm not sure about the resources - there sure
were a lot of uruk-high at helms deep...
>>
>> Khamul, my problem was this: Uruks already have
>> 1)pikes (a huge advantage on spears like most
armies have)
>> 2)cross-bows (best ype of bows in the
game)
>> 3)beserkers (one of only non hero units with
2 atacks)
>> 4)strength 5 captains (enough
said)
>> 5)wargs that can fight without riders
>> 6)ability to use warg or rider stats
>>
7)and now trolls! surely for an army without cavalry this
would spell doom! used with uruk high that is a huge number of
attacks and high fight values - they have more options than
several other armies put together - and a pike block with a
troll on each flank would make an army invincible almost - the
only advantage of being able to cavalry the sides would be
gone - and a trolls high fight value would win most battles
anyway...
Wow thats a good list. Now why dont
you explain how that would be a high point cost army. I could
make a Harad army with just as many points and be just as
effective.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
Grimhelm mailto:grimhelm@gmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement
Replies [0].
This Reply Posted [6/1/2006 10:18].
|
|
>> I'm not sure about the
resources - there sure were a lot of uruk-high at helms
deep...
And that's because the resources were better
invested in a lot of Uruk-hai than in a handful of Trolls ;)
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - morvegil
Replies [6]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
13:23].
|
|
>> >> There is also proof
that he used cave trolls (saruman that is, not tolkien) in
Fangorn Forest. The ents go on about hating the orcs
especially the big lumbering ones that knaw at the higher
trees, half-naked.
>>
>> An interesting
point, but that doesn't necessarily equate to Trolls in the
army, as I will outline in a moment.
>>
>>
Firstly, Abalrogofmorgoth, that has to be the best laid-out
debate I've seen since I discussed the identity of the Variags
when GW released them. However, you're all missing the biggest
point. It may or may not be tactical to have a Troll run amok
at Helms Deep, but it's certainly not very strategic. Think
about it from an economic perspective:
>>
>>
>> 1) TIME AND RESOURCES
>>
Saruman has to armour 10,000 Uruk-hai. That takes a huge
amount of time and resources - in fact it would have halted
completely if he had only used the wood in Isengard and not
moved into Fangorn Forest. If he is trying to catch the
Rohirrim at their weakest, he needs to have his army ready
quickly. Rohan has 10,000 riders if it is given the time to
muster them, but because Saruman forced them to prepare
quickly, they only had about 2,000 at the Battle of the
Hornburg. With such short time, an Isengard Troll
(considerably larger than an Uruk) would require quite a bit
of investment of time and resources, which are needed already
for the Uruk-hai. Therefore, arming a Troll for war is in fact
counter-productive for the wider war strategy.
>> By
extension:
Not really, so your saying massive armies
dont ever create "Elite Units". So say, it would be counter
productive to have TANKS in your army?
>>
>> 2) SKILL AND INVESTMENT
>> The Orcs of
Isengard are largely unskilled, and only trained in
manufacturing Uruk-hai armour. Saruman would need to waste
even more time in showing the Orcs how to make the much larger
Troll armour. Furthermore, they would probably do a poor job,
and there is the risk to the "employees". Look at how in the
film Lurtz killed one of the Orcs at work. In the books, the
Uruk-hai viewed the Orcs as inferior, and were very cruel to
them. Imagine how an Isengard Troll would treat the Orcs - not
very good for Saruman's employee relations, let alone the war
effort as a whole.
Have you seen the isendgard armor?
Its just plates of iron smacked together, a 2 year old could
create that.
>> The Solution is:
>>
>> 3) WORKFORCE
>> Saruman needs the
Troll's abilities elsewhere. He can't afford to fully arm a
troll, but he can speed up production immensely if he has the
Troll working in the pits arming the rest of his army. A
Troll's strength would be a huge asset in the running of the
machinery in the forges, and the amount of Uruk-hai he could
churn out with one Troll are much more than the Trolls he
could churn out with many Uruk-hai. To Alirox's point, this
would explain the possibility of Trolls working in Fangorn
Forest - off the battlefield, it should be
noted.
Trolls dont need to be trained. Do you think the
trolls in Moria were trained? You just slap on some armor and
give them something to swing with.
>> This, of
course, leads us to:
>>
>> 4)
TACTICS
>> As has already been mentioned, from a
strategic and economic viewpoint, Trolls in the army would be
unviable, but would be very useful in the workforce. The
"Fighting Uruk-hai" are already the pinnacle of Isengard's
achievements and the deadliest force in Middle-earth without a
Troll as back-up. A Troll would be an obvious target for any
army, as it is so huge. At Helm's Deep, the Elves (film) or
Rohirrim (books) would shoot it down long before it even
reached the walls. At the Fords of the Isen, the riders could
easily avoid the lumbering giant long enough to bring it down.
An army of Trolls might work, but that would, again, be far
too expensive and unable to avoid Tolkien's mention.
So
what your saying is trolls are useless across the board? I've
guess you've never played a troll. You keepo it defending and
give the opponent other targets.
>>
>>
>> There you have it, I've done the impossible. I've
proven a point regarding the works of Tolkien using logic,
logistics and economics. Hopefully, I've been able to explain
this side of the debate without Tolkien purism or even saying
the game will be unbalanced (these two arguements are valid,
but almost cliche at this point).
Not been proven, but
just examples based on opinion.
>>
>>
To lighten up the arguement, have some more of the works of
Tolkien from an economic perspective (sorry, couldn't
resist):
>>
https://www.angelfire.com/rings/firstwarofthering/Humour/Chronicle.html
>>
>> QED, E&OE
>> -Grimhelm
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement - Grimhelm
mailto:grimhelm@gmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement
Replies [5].
This Reply Posted [6/1/2006 13:23].
|
|
>> >> 1) TIME AND
RESOURCES
>> >> Saruman has to armour 10,000
Uruk-hai. That takes a huge amount of time and resources - in
fact it would have halted completely if he had only used the
wood in Isengard and not moved into Fangorn Forest. If he is
trying to catch the Rohirrim at their weakest, he needs to
have his army ready quickly. Rohan has 10,000 riders if it is
given the time to muster them, but because Saruman forced them
to prepare quickly, they only had about 2,000 at the Battle of
the Hornburg. With such short time, an Isengard Troll
(considerably larger than an Uruk) would require quite a bit
of investment of time and resources, which are needed already
for the Uruk-hai. Therefore, arming a Troll for war is in fact
counter-productive for the wider war strategy.
>>
>> By extension:
>>
>> Not really, so
your saying massive armies dont ever create "Elite Units". So
say, it would be counter productive to have TANKS in your
army?
If you have the time to invest in tank
production. Saruman DIDN'T have the time, as he had to catch
the Rohirrim at their weakest. Which would you rather
have?
A) 10000 Uruk-hai against 2000 Rohirrim, or
B)
10000 Uruk-hai and a handful of Trolls against 10000
Rohirrim
Given the time they would be devastating, but
for the speed involved Trolls would even the playing field in
Rohan's favour.
>> >> 2) SKILL AND
INVESTMENT
>> >> The Orcs of Isengard are
largely unskilled, and only trained in manufacturing Uruk-hai
armour. Saruman would need to waste even more time in showing
the Orcs how to make the much larger Troll armour.
Furthermore, they would probably do a poor job, and there is
the risk to the "employees". Look at how in the film Lurtz
killed one of the Orcs at work. In the books, the Uruk-hai
viewed the Orcs as inferior, and were very cruel to them.
Imagine how an Isengard Troll would treat the Orcs - not very
good for Saruman's employee relations, let alone the war
effort as a whole.
>>
>> Have you seen the
isendgard armor? Its just plates of iron smacked together, a 2
year old could create that.
Exactly - if the armour was
really that crude, it would be useless to a Troll, hence it
would get shot down. But my point is they would have to make
larger forges for smelting larger quantities of iron, and
larger moulds for the larger plates. The speed of Isengard's
armies had to be in days; not weeks or
months.
>> >> 3) WORKFORCE
>>
>> Saruman needs the Troll's abilities elsewhere. He
can't afford to fully arm a troll, but he can speed up
production immensely if he has the Troll working in the pits
arming the rest of his army. A Troll's strength would be a
huge asset in the running of the machinery in the forges, and
the amount of Uruk-hai he could churn out with one Troll are
much more than the Trolls he could churn out with many
Uruk-hai. To Alirox's point, this would explain the
possibility of Trolls working in Fangorn Forest - off the
battlefield, it should be noted.
>>
>>
Trolls dont need to be trained. Do you think the trolls in
Moria were trained? You just slap on some armor and give them
something to swing with.
No, I don't think the Trolls
needed to be trained. I never said they needed to be trained.
Why are you refuting a point I never made?
If you had
read that point, you would see that production is FASTER when
Trolls are arming Uruks - not Uruks arming Trolls. Even in the
films, Trolls were needed to open the Black Gate with pullies
and machinery. Saruman - the master of the machine - would be
stupid not to have Trolls involved in the manufacture of
armour and weaponry. Are you saying that a Troll isn't
effective in the manufacturing stages?
>>
>> 4) TACTICS
>> >> As has already been
mentioned, from a strategic and economic viewpoint, Trolls in
the army would be unviable, but would be very useful in the
workforce. The "Fighting Uruk-hai" are already the pinnacle of
Isengard's achievements and the deadliest force in
Middle-earth without a Troll as back-up. A Troll would be an
obvious target for any army, as it is so huge. At Helm's Deep,
the Elves (film) or Rohirrim (books) would shoot it down long
before it even reached the walls. At the Fords of the Isen,
the riders could easily avoid the lumbering giant long enough
to bring it down. An army of Trolls might work, but that
would, again, be far too expensive and unable to avoid
Tolkien's mention.
>>
>> So what your
saying is trolls are useless across the board? I've guess
you've never played a troll. You keepo it defending and give
the opponent other targets.
I did not say that. I said
they can be tactically useful. Hoewever, they are NOT
strategically useful. Trolls may win a battle, but they can't
win a war. A well-trained and quickly equipped army of
Uruk-hai are needed for that. Trolls work against many
opponents, but the Rohirrim are different. The Rohirrim have
light cavalry (able to outmanouevre and shoot down Trolls),
and when they don't they are behind the walls of the Hornburg,
which Trolls can't climb over or break down. Trolls could work
loading the siege engines, but they wouldn't be too effective
in the front lines of a siege.
>> >>
There you have it, I've done the impossible. I've proven a
point regarding the works of Tolkien using logic, logistics
and economics. Hopefully, I've been able to explain this side
of the debate without Tolkien purism or even saying the game
will be unbalanced (these two arguements are valid, but almost
cliche at this point).
>>
>> Not been
proven, but just examples based on opinion.
You have
not disproven it either - you have avoided my main points and
backed it up with you own opinions. My argument is not based
on opinions - it is based on common sense, logic and simple
logistics. I have yet to see a good counter
argument.
-Grimhelm
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
TheGreatLizard
Replies [2]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
12:19].
|
|
Whilst I hate the concept of the
Isengard Troll, the 'economy' reason doesn't really work for
me.
You simply have Trolls down in the pits working the
machinary, and when war comes about take them out of the pits
so they can do some whacking.
It would have taken much
the same time to arm a Troll as maybe 5 Uraks.
Though I
guess I can see some logic in your point. Why arm a Troll when
you have your sights set on all of Rohan? A Troll is no help
in fighting against all of Rohan because it's more than a
day's march to anywhere useful and the Troll will just turn to
stone on the way. Any Trolls you arm will be purely defensive,
and it is well shown in both the books and movies, defence
wasn't a high priority in Saruman's mind because he left
himself way too open to attack from the Ents (if he'd had
better foresight he may have set up a better defence to battle
against any counter attacks, but he put all his eggs in one
basket trying to take over Rohan).
So I guess the merit
in the 'economy' issue is that Saruman had a mind to conquer
Rohan, a task not suited to Trolls as they turn to stone, so
he wouldn't have bothered arming them.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
Grimhelm mailto:grimhelm@gmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement
Replies [1].
This Reply Posted [6/1/2006 12:19].
|
|
>> Whilst I hate the concept of
the Isengard Troll, the 'economy' reason doesn't really work
for me.
>>
>> You simply have Trolls down
in the pits working the machinary, and when war comes about
take them out of the pits so they can do some
whacking.
>>
>> It would have taken much
the same time to arm a Troll as maybe 5 Uraks.
Perhaps,
but it's not just a matter of the time arming a troll - it's
the opportunity cost (economics). A Troll in the production
stages would speed up the arming process exponentially -
faster production of armour means faster production of Uruks.
If you take away the Troll from the workforce, you take away a
significant part of the means for making the Uruks.
In
economics, there are four factors of production:
1) Raw
materials (natural capital) - this is needed most for the
Uruk-hai.
2) Labour services ("human" capital) - these are
the Orcs, or Trolls to speed up the war effort.
3) Capital
goods - this is the heavy machinery, which Saruman also needs
to create.
4) Premises - this is Isengard itself, which
Saruman has already.
And of course there is TIME. For
speed and competitiveness in a real/fantasy world environment,
trolls are best as a factor of production, not a product of
it.
>> Though I guess I can see some logic in
your point. Why arm a Troll when you have your sights set on
all of Rohan? A Troll is no help in fighting against all of
Rohan because it's more than a day's march to anywhere useful
and the Troll will just turn to stone on the way. Any Trolls
you arm will be purely defensive, and it is well shown in both
the books and movies, defence wasn't a high priority in
Saruman's mind because he left himself way too open to attack
from the Ents (if he'd had better foresight he may have set up
a better defence to battle against any counter attacks, but he
put all his eggs in one basket trying to take over
Rohan).
>>
>> So I guess the merit in the
'economy' issue is that Saruman had a mind to conquer Rohan, a
task not suited to Trolls as they turn to stone, so he
wouldn't have bothered arming them.
It's logistics,
really. Saruman had to think strategically (macro-management),
not tactically (micro-management). Trolls working undergroung
in the pits, operating heavy machinery (Saruman's true
ingeniouity) and speeding up production, answers the argument
of them turning to stone (whether Isengard Trolls would or
wouldn't have turned to stone).
-Grimhelm
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement - TheGreatLizard
Replies [0]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
12:19].
|
|
I really dont see the relevance of
what you say. Its all highly debatable whether its wise for
Saruman to take some of the time manufacturing Uraks to deal
with Trolls.
Its not excessively hard to make troll
armour. Ok, if there is only 10 or 20 trolls in Isengard,
focus on your 10000 Uraks instead. But if there are several
hundred trolls, its worth setting up a plant for the
manufacture of Troll armour and weapons. Assuming the Trolls
are fit to go into sunlight to help with battles. At least I
think so, you may not agree.
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
morvegil
Replies [1]. This Reply Posted [6/1/2006
13:23].
|
|
>> >> >> 1) TIME
AND RESOURCES
>> >> >> Saruman has to
armour 10,000 Uruk-hai. That takes a huge amount of time and
resources - in fact it would have halted completely if he had
only used the wood in Isengard and not moved into Fangorn
Forest. If he is trying to catch the Rohirrim at their
weakest, he needs to have his army ready quickly. Rohan has
10,000 riders if it is given the time to muster them, but
because Saruman forced them to prepare quickly, they only had
about 2,000 at the Battle of the Hornburg. With such short
time, an Isengard Troll (considerably larger than an Uruk)
would require quite a bit of investment of time and resources,
which are needed already for the Uruk-hai. Therefore, arming a
Troll for war is in fact counter-productive for the wider war
strategy.
>> >> >> By
extension:
>> >>
>> >> Not
really, so your saying massive armies dont ever create "Elite
Units". So say, it would be counter productive to have TANKS
in your army?
>>
>> If you have the time to
invest in tank production. Saruman DIDN'T have the time, as he
had to catch the Rohirrim at their weakest. Which would you
rather have?
>> A) 10000 Uruk-hai against 2000
Rohirrim, or
>> B) 10000 Uruk-hai and a handful of
Trolls against 10000 Rohirrim
>>
>> Given
the time they would be devastating, but for the speed involved
Trolls would even the playing field in Rohan's
favour.
What, Saruman's been planning this war for
ATLEAST 20 years...and before then even. Think about it, the
movie portrays as a few weeks.
He had plenty of time,
so the whole time investment thing is mute.
>>
>> >> 2) SKILL AND INVESTMENT
>> >>
>> The Orcs of Isengard are largely unskilled, and only
trained in manufacturing Uruk-hai armour. Saruman would need
to waste even more time in showing the Orcs how to make the
much larger Troll armour. Furthermore, they would probably do
a poor job, and there is the risk to the "employees". Look at
how in the film Lurtz killed one of the Orcs at work. In the
books, the Uruk-hai viewed the Orcs as inferior, and were very
cruel to them. Imagine how an Isengard Troll would treat the
Orcs - not very good for Saruman's employee relations, let
alone the war effort as a whole.
>> >>
>> >> Have you seen the isendgard armor? Its
just plates of iron smacked together, a 2 year old could
create that.
>>
>> Exactly - if the armour
was really that crude, it would be useless to a Troll, hence
it would get shot down. But my point is they would have to
make larger forges for smelting larger quantities of iron, and
larger moulds for the larger plates. The speed of Isengard's
armies had to be in days; not weeks or months.
No, they
use the normal molds and bolt them together. It offers some
protection against arrows.
>>
>>
>> >> >> 3) WORKFORCE
>>
>> >> Saruman needs the Troll's abilities
elsewhere. He can't afford to fully arm a troll, but he can
speed up production immensely if he has the Troll working in
the pits arming the rest of his army. A Troll's strength would
be a huge asset in the running of the machinery in the forges,
and the amount of Uruk-hai he could churn out with one Troll
are much more than the Trolls he could churn out with many
Uruk-hai. To Alirox's point, this would explain the
possibility of Trolls working in Fangorn Forest - off the
battlefield, it should be noted.
>> >>
>> >> Trolls dont need to be trained. Do you
think the trolls in Moria were trained? You just slap on some
armor and give them something to swing with.
>>
>> No, I don't think the Trolls needed to be
trained. I never said they needed to be trained. Why are you
refuting a point I never made?
You insuiated it, admit
it. I am right again.
>>
>> If you had read
that point, you would see that production is FASTER when
Trolls are arming Uruks - not Uruks arming Trolls. Even in the
films, Trolls were needed to open the Black Gate with pullies
and machinery. Saruman - the master of the machine - would be
stupid not to have Trolls involved in the manufacture of
armour and weaponry. Are you saying that a Troll isn't
effective in the manufacturing stages?
>>
Onlyin heavy lifting. Forging bolts and nuts to put
armor togetheris left in the hands of small orcs.
>>
>> >> >> 4) TACTICS
>> >>
>> As has already been mentioned, from a strategic and
economic viewpoint, Trolls in the army would be unviable, but
would be very useful in the workforce. The "Fighting Uruk-hai"
are already the pinnacle of Isengard's achievements and the
deadliest force in Middle-earth without a Troll as back-up. A
Troll would be an obvious target for any army, as it is so
huge. At Helm's Deep, the Elves (film) or Rohirrim (books)
would shoot it down long before it even reached the walls. At
the Fords of the Isen, the riders could easily avoid the
lumbering giant long enough to bring it down. An army of
Trolls might work, but that would, again, be far too expensive
and unable to avoid Tolkien's mention.
>> >>
>> >> So what your saying is trolls are
useless across the board? I've guess you've never played a
troll. You keepo it defending and give the opponent other
targets.
No, you keep the trolls in the rear while the
uruks clean the walls. Then once the gates are broken u send
in the trolls!
>>
>> I did not say
that. I said they can be tactically useful. Hoewever, they are
NOT strategically useful. Trolls may win a battle, but they
can't win a war. A well-trained and quickly equipped army of
Uruk-hai are needed for that. Trolls work against many
opponents, but the Rohirrim are different. The Rohirrim have
light cavalry (able to outmanouevre and shoot down Trolls),
and when they don't they are behind the walls of the Hornburg,
which Trolls can't climb over or break down. Trolls could work
loading the siege engines, but they wouldn't be too effective
in the front lines of a siege.
So put them in the
backline.
>>
>>
>> >>
>> There you have it, I've done the impossible. I've
proven a point regarding the works of Tolkien using logic,
logistics and economics. Hopefully, I've been able to explain
this side of the debate without Tolkien purism or even saying
the game will be unbalanced (these two arguements are valid,
but almost cliche at this point).
>> >>
>> >> Not been proven, but just examples based
on opinion.
>>
>> You have not disproven it
either - you have avoided my main points and backed it up with
you own opinions. My argument is not based on opinions - it is
based on common sense, logic and simple logistics. I have yet
to see a good counter argument.
>>
>>
-Grimhelm
Reply
Top |
|
RE: RE: RE: RE:
RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a Arguement -
Grimhelm mailto:grimhelm@gmail.com?subject=RE:
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Isengard Troll -- A debate not a
Arguement
Replies [0].
This Reply Posted [6/1/2006 13:23].
|
|
>> >> >> >>
1) TIME AND RESOURCES
>> >> >> >>
Saruman has to armour 10,000 Uruk-hai. That takes a huge
amount of time and resources - in fact it would have halted
completely if he had only used the wood in Isengard and not
moved into Fangorn Forest. If he is trying to catch the
Rohirrim at their weakest, he needs to have his army ready
quickly. Rohan has 10,000 riders if it is given the time to
muster them, but because Saruman forced them to prepare
quickly, they only had about 2,000 at the Battle of the
Hornburg. With such short time, an Isengard Troll
(considerably larger than an Uruk) would require quite a bit
of investment of time and resources, which are needed already
for the Uruk-hai. Therefore, arming a Troll for war is in fact
counter-productive for the wider war strategy.
>>
>> >> >> By extension:
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> Not really, so your
saying massive armies dont ever create "Elite Units". So say,
it would be counter productive to have TANKS in your
army?
>> >>
>> >> If you have
the time to invest in tank production. Saruman DIDN'T have the
time, as he had to catch the Rohirrim at their weakest. Which
would you rather have?
>> >> A) 10000 Uruk-hai
against 2000 Rohirrim, or
>> >> B) 10000
Uruk-hai and a handful of Trolls against 10000
Rohirrim
>> >>
>> >> Given the
time they would be devastating, but for the speed involved
Trolls would even the playing field in Rohan's
favour.
>>
>> What, Saruman's been planning
this war for ATLEAST 20 years...and before then even. Think
about it, the movie portrays as a few weeks.
>>
>> He had plenty of time, so the whole time
investment thing is mute.
10000 Uruk-hai is still a
huge effort. Regardless of if how long he was planning it, it
would be impossible to tear apart the grounds at Isengard and
start production for 20 years without attracting someone's
attention. If he was really at it for that long, and he had
enough time to make such effective Trolls, why did he attack
so late (after the Rohirrim had garrisoned, no less), and why
did he lose?
>> >> >> >> 2)
SKILL AND INVESTMENT
>> >> >> >>
The Orcs of Isengard are largely unskilled, and only trained
in manufacturing Uruk-hai armour. Saruman would need to waste
even more time in showing the Orcs how to make the much larger
Troll armour. Furthermore, they would probably do a poor job,
and there is the risk to the "employees". Look at how in the
film Lurtz killed one of the Orcs at work. In the books, the
Uruk-hai viewed the Orcs as inferior, and were very cruel to
them. Imagine how an Isengard Troll would treat the Orcs - not
very good for Saruman's employee relations, let alone the war
effort as a whole.
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> Have you seen the isendgard armor? Its just
plates of iron smacked together, a 2 year old could create
that.
>> >>
>> >> Exactly - if
the armour was really that crude, it would be useless to a
Troll, hence it would get shot down. But my point is they
would have to make larger forges for smelting larger
quantities of iron, and larger moulds for the larger plates.
The speed of Isengard's armies had to be in days; not weeks or
months.
>>
>> No, they use the normal molds
and bolt them together. It offers some protection against
arrows.
To repeat your question "Have you seen the
isendgard armor?" They don't just use the same moulds. Normal
Uruk-sized armour wouldn't fit. Can you imagine being able to
fit a normal Uruk helmet onto a Troll's
head?
>> >> >> >> 3)
WORKFORCE
>> >> >> >> Saruman needs
the Troll's abilities elsewhere. He can't afford to fully arm
a troll, but he can speed up production immensely if he has
the Troll working in the pits arming the rest of his army. A
Troll's strength would be a huge asset in the running of the
machinery in the forges, and the amount of Uruk-hai he could
churn out with one Troll are much more than the Trolls he
could churn out with many Uruk-hai. To Alirox's point, this
would explain the possibility of Trolls working in Fangorn
Forest - off the battlefield, it should be noted.
>>
>> >>
>> >> >> Trolls dont
need to be trained. Do you think the trolls in Moria were
trained? You just slap on some armor and give them something
to swing with.
>> >>
>> >> No,
I don't think the Trolls needed to be trained. I never said
they needed to be trained. Why are you refuting a point I
never made?
>>
>> You insuiated it, admit
it. I am right again.
"Insuiated"? What? You can't be
right if I never made that point. I was talking about
workforce - not combat training! Besides, you don't see the
untrained Trolls of Moria running rampant outside the Misty
Mountains.
>> >> If you had read that
point, you would see that production is FASTER when Trolls are
arming Uruks - not Uruks arming Trolls. Even in the films,
Trolls were needed to open the Black Gate with pullies and
machinery. Saruman - the master of the machine - would be
stupid not to have Trolls involved in the manufacture of
armour and weaponry. Are you saying that a Troll isn't
effective in the manufacturing stages?
>> >>
>> Onlyin heavy lifting. Forging bolts and nuts to
put armor togetheris left in the hands of small
orcs.
At least you concede that Trolls are useful, but
again, you fail to answer my point, and seem rather to back
mine up. It is simple economics. As I have already said, there
are four factors of production:
1) Raw materials
(natural capital) - this is needed most for the Uruk-hai, and
such quantities of iron for arming Trolls are hard to come by
without great expense. Saruman needs to take the Free Peoples
by surprise, and importing more iron can't be kept out of
their attention for long.
2) Labour services ("human"
capital) - these are the Orcs, but Trolls can be used to speed
up the war effort.
3) Capital goods - this is the
machinery, which Saruman also needs to create.
4) Premises
- this is Isengard itself, which Saruman has
already.
Now, which is more effective at creating 10000
Uruk-hai?
A) Light industry operated by Orcs, producing
Uruk-hai at a slow rate.
B) Heavy industry operated by
Trolls, producing Uruk-hai at a MUCH faster
rate.
Obviously only Orcs can operate the nuts and
bolts as you point out, and will be making most of the armour.
However! There are still many more jobs a Troll is best suited
for - in fact covering ALL FOUR of the factors of
production!
1) Building the mighty dam on the River Isen,
and assembling the heavy machinery to harness the power of
water (capital goods).
2) Digging the pits beneath Orthanc,
where the machines are operated (premises).
3) Carrying the
wood from Fangorn Forest, to fuel the fires of Isengard
(natural resources).
4) Turning the cogs and pulleys for
lifting and lowering the platforms in the pits, to transport
the Orc workmen and raw materials; turning the massive
cauldrons needed for the smelting process ("human"
capital).
>> >> >> >> 4)
TACTICS
>> >> >> >> As has already
been mentioned, from a strategic and economic viewpoint,
Trolls in the army would be unviable, but would be very useful
in the workforce. The "Fighting Uruk-hai" are already the
pinnacle of Isengard's achievements and the deadliest force in
Middle-earth without a Troll as back-up. A Troll would be an
obvious target for any army, as it is so huge. At Helm's Deep,
the Elves (film) or Rohirrim (books) would shoot it down long
before it even reached the walls. At the Fords of the Isen,
the riders could easily avoid the lumbering giant long enough
to bring it down. An army of Trolls might work, but that
would, again, be far too expensive and unable to avoid
Tolkien's mention.
>> >> >>
>>
>> >> So what your saying is trolls are useless
across the board? I've guess you've never played a troll. You
keepo it defending and give the opponent other
targets.
>> >>
>> >> I did not
say that. I said they can be tactically useful. Hoewever, they
are NOT strategically useful. Trolls may win a battle, but
they can't win a war. A well-trained and quickly equipped army
of Uruk-hai are needed for that. Trolls work against many
opponents, but the Rohirrim are different. The Rohirrim have
light cavalry (able to outmanouevre and shoot down Trolls),
and when they don't they are behind the walls of the Hornburg,
which Trolls can't climb over or break down. Trolls could work
loading the siege engines, but they wouldn't be too effective
in the front lines of a siege.
>>
>> No,
you keep the trolls in the rear while the uruks clean the
walls. Then once the gates are broken u send in the
trolls!
>>
>> So put them in the
backline.
Trolls just aren't necessary. An Uruk-hai
pike-block or heavy siege engine could do the job just as
easily, and we're talking about a campaign, not a single
battle. Light cavalry can flank the Uruk-hai and get to the
Trolls at the back, or just fire at them from the front (it's
rather hard to hide a HUGE Troll behind a few
ranks).
>> >> >> >> There
you have it, I've done the impossible. I've proven a point
regarding the works of Tolkien using logic, logistics and
economics. Hopefully, I've been able to explain this side of
the debate without Tolkien purism or even saying the game will
be unbalanced (these two arguments are valid, but almost
cliche at this point).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Not been proven, but just
examples based on opinion.
>> >>
>>
>> You have not disproven it either - you have avoided
my main points and backed it up with you own opinions. My
argument is not based on opinions - it is based on common
sense, logic and simple logistics. I have yet to see a good
counter argument.
I'm sorry, but you just haven't
put up a convincing argument. We both have our own opinions,
but I have backed up mine logically with economic and logistic
fact before reaching my conclusion.
-Grimhelm
Reply
Top |
|
