[Rohan Spoilers] The <<Blank>> of Nan Mordeleb

[bluejay]

Good point Terisonen.

I think I misread the initial comment about Anduril from Arthadan, I get it now. As for weapons the Fellowship carried that could harm the balrog, I assume Glamdring is considered a given. By the same reckoning, Sting should be effective as it was also a blade of Gondolin. We know that Narsil was able to cut Sauron so Anduril should be effective against another Maiar.

I agree with Arthadan that there's no reason to suggest that the Dunadain blades carried by the Hobbits should have any effect against a Balrog.

I don't remember the rest of the Fellowship carrying any weapons of great renown.

As for which weapons a fellowship might find, the Rivendell rules for magical items tend to assume that Elven/Dwarven weapons could come from as far back as the First Age.

[Terisonen]

The dagger of Merry was effective against the Witch-king, so I would count weapon from Numènor also effective against Balrog, because the dagger have been effective against a being with strong tie from the spiritual world.

[bluejay]

You absolutely could be right there Terisonen however my understanding was that it was wound with spells specifically for the undoing of Angmar as it was forged when the Dunedain were fighting Angmar. As it says in the text when Merry strikes the Witch King: "No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will".

[Glorelendil]

In this debate (and many others) we need to distinguish between what is necessary in canon versus what is permissible. Something not mentioned in the texts that also doesn't contradict them is a case of the latter. Some of us prefer a more restrictive interpretation ("anything not explicitly permitted is banned") while others prefer a more permissible interpretation ("anything not explicitly banned is permitted"). Neither version has a superior claim; the choice is entirely aesthetic.

Did Tolkien intend for there to be another Balrog lurking around Middle-earth at the end of the 3rd Age? I think probably not. But does anything he wrote explicitly prohibit it? Also no.

If I were writing the story of this world I would have Durin's Bane be the Last Balrog. But it seems a shame to preclude any possibility of interesting adventures by dogmatically insisting on this interpretation. Many of us get our pleasure from RPGs by having those epic adventures, not by admiring the fidelity of our imagined world.

An argument for or against additional Balrogs (or whether they can fly) should be based on the impact on the narrative, not on some imagined "truth".

[DavetheLost]

Tolkien himself was somewhat contradictory on the number of Balrogs in Middle Earth. In some writings he speaks of hordes and thousands, in others he limits their number to 3-7. We need to remember that both in and out of "character" Middle Earth was a continually evolving legendarium. In character the Red Book, from which the two novels of prime interest to the game are derived, was compiled primarily by the Hobbits then translated into English by Tolkien, it should not be taken as a third person omniscient source. Out of character Tolkien frequently went back and revised and rewrote earlier writings to bring them into accordance with his later thoughts.

As for the daggers of Westernesse borne by the Hobbits there were four of these. Each Hobbit was given one by Bombadil in the Barrow Downs. Frodo's was broken in the confrontation with the Nazgul at the Ford, Sam's was captured with Frodo in Cirith Ungol, Merry's perished strking the Witch King. Though forged for use against Angmar such blades would likely be useful against Balrogs as well.

I am not convinced that other weapons would be useless against a Balrog. We have no record either way. The sword borne by Durin's Bane shattered against Glamdring, but this could have been as much a factor of the blade being wielded by Gandalf as anything intrinsic to the sword. There are other cases of creatures that seem to be as much or more spirit than mortal being effected by mortal weaponry. I suspect it highly unlikely that a mortal blade in ordinary hands would do significant harm to a Balrog, but I don't recall Tolkien stating it to be impossible. After all Eowyn slew the Witch King with an ordinary sword, and a fair helping of fate.

[Arthadan]

I am not convinced that other weapons would be useless against a Balrog. We have no record either way. The sword borne by Durin's Bane shattered against Glamdring, but this could have been as much a factor of the blade being wielded by Gandalf as anything intrinsic to the sword. There are other cases of creatures that seem to be as much or more spirit than mortal being effected by mortal weaponry. I suspect it highly unlikely that a mortal blade in ordinary hands would do significant harm to a Balrog, but I don't recall Tolkien stating it to be impossible. After all Eowyn slew the Witch King with an ordinary sword, and a fair helping of fate.

It's not the same. Nazgûl can chose to appear as naked spirit of terror or "dressed" in a material (yet invisible) body. In the first form they can travel at great speed and they are perceived by any living creature as a source of unamed terror, in the second they can interact with the material (ride horses, wield weapons, stab Frodo, etc). So in the case of Eowyn vs. the Witch-king there was a material body (or something similar enough).

On the other hand, the balrog seems to be literally "shadow and flame", It is not some creature of flesh and bone. We never have a clear description, it is always a shadowy menacing figure:

`You cannot pass,' he said. The orcs stood still, and a dead silence fell. `I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn. Go back to the Shadow! You cannot pass.'
The Balrog made no answer. The fire in it seemed to die, but the darkness grew. It stepped forward slowly on to the bridge, and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall; but still Gandalf could be seen, glimmering in the gloom; he seemed small, and altogether alone: grey and bent, like a wizened tree before the onset of a storm. From out of the shadow a red sword leaped flaming.
Glamdring glittered white in answer.
There was a ringing clash and a stab of white fire. The Balrog fell back and its sword flew up in molten fragments. The wizard swayed on the bridge, stepped back a pace, and then again stood still.

It's worth noting Glamdring seems to recognized an old hated foe and shines white in response to the shadow.

[DavetheLost]

The Nazgul did begin as mortal Men, then faded. The Balrogs seem to have begun as spirits of fear, shadow, and fame. Tolkien does refer to the Balrog of Moria's mane as streaming behind it and kindling from the fire, also its nostrils stream fire, and later Gandalf clutches at its heel and is smote upon the mountainside and breaks it in its ruin. These suggest at least some degree of physicality.

I would argue that in the hands of a Big Damn Hero a mortal weapon might be able to hurt a Balrog enough to hold it at bay or even drive it back for a brief period, but I think considerably more than that would be required to slay one. Just as Aragorn and the Hobbits were able to hold back the Nazgul with torches and the Name of Elbereth, but the determined assault to wound Frodo with the Morgul knife still got through.

Mostly though a Balrog is going to be a foe beyond any in late Third Age Middle Earth. Even the Ents are scared...

[Glorelendil]

If the Balrog were incorporeal then it couldn't hold a sword that makes a ringing clash, or that disintegrates into molten fragments.

Hmm? Hmm?

[Arthadan]

If the Balrog were incorporeal then it couldn't hold a sword that makes a ringing clash, or that disintegrates into molten fragments.

Hmm? Hmm?

A Wizard did it!

You and DavetheLost have made me change my mind about this, he seems to have some kind of body.

[Terisonen]

The Balrog is corporeal, has say Gandalf when he describe his pursuit after the fall from the bridge of Khazad-Dum. Gandalf describe the body of the Balrog after falling in the water in the Deep (Sorry I can't find in english since I have read it in French ) as 'slimy' .

Nonetheless, the Balrog is as much from the spiritual world to the physical world. In a sense, it's a spirit who as formed a body, like all Maiar. And (for me) only weapon with 'Magical' properties are able to strike in the spiritual world.
Eowyn was a different things: for it was is fate to kill the Witch-King (sort of a 'Hand of the Maiar on the spot' ).