Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
post an article bar get help! sort by: subject bar date bar most recent bar author
 FORUM :
 TOPICS : - of
First previous next last
Search
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):
http://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):
>> http://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


First previous next last