Why did the Nazgul not succeed in Bree and on Weathertop? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Ibrîniðilpathânezel · 02-20-2008, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alatar

Sounds like prophecy is a little too self-fulfilling and circular. Who is the intended one? The one that fulfills the prophecy. Who fulfills the prophecy? Why, the intended one, of course.

That's always the catch-22 with prophecies whenever they don't come to pass, isn't it? "Oh, it just [/I]looked[/I] like that person was the intended one. There must've been something we didn't know about that was off."

And in some ways, that is the same kind of circular reasoning that could be running through the Nazguls' heads: This hobbit is holding the Ring. We're supposed to get the Ring away from him and get it back to Sauron to make him powerful again. But as long as Sauron doesn't have the Ring... well, he doesn't have the Ring, so this guy who does have it might just be a threat, 'cause, after all, nobody else has ever actually claimed the Ring and tried to use it, so how do we know this guy couldn't just up and decide, "hey, the Ring's mine, I'm gonna use it, so I'm gonna be your new master." If he does that and he's ticked off at us for trying to kill him or kidnap him, we could be in BIG trouble....

Okay, that made my head spin... or maybe it's the sinuses....

And thanks for the welcome, alatar.

Sir Kohran · 02-20-2008, 05:06 PM

The thing is that the Nazgul simply weren't particularly powerful. I mean, what power did they actually have? They carry swords, have nasty voices and that's pretty much it. Also they have a surprisingly high amount of weaknesses - fire, water and the very name of Elbereth. Heck, Aragorn by himself drove off five of them with a *torch*. He was able to make them flee without even drawing steel.

The Nazgul are somewhat like terrorists; the paranoia, uncertainty and overall psychological effect associated with them are in many ways more powerful than the actual beings themselves.

William Cloud Hicklin · 02-20-2008, 05:27 PM

Well, let's not underestimate the value of fear as a weapon.

Tolkien understood this thoroughly, having survived the Somme. When he spoke of Gondor's men under the Nazguls' wings going fetal, 'thinking only of crawling and hiding, and of death,' I'm sure he had seen that very thing, and probably experienced a touch of it himself.

Napoleon described battle as 'two large groups of men trying to frighten each other.' And of course Boney knew exactly what he was talking about. A battle is not won by killing everyone on the other side (usually only a small percentage get killed)- but rather inflicting so much punishment on them that their morale- that complex of factors involving discipline, training, tactical position, loyalty, esprit-de-corps etc etc etc, gives way to the basic instinct for self-preservation. You win by making the other side give up.

The so-called 'Third Generation' of board wargames began to incorporate this understanding back in the 1970s; units had a 'morale factor' which could be raised or lowered by various things, and when reduced to a certain point retreat, rout or surrender ensued. Many, many times I would have *loved* to have a couple of 'morale-killer' units which did no physical harm, but simply hit every enemy within range with a -5 morale penalty.

And that's just what the Nazgul were.

02-20-2008, 05:06 PM	#2
Sir Kohran Wight Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: England, UK Posts: 178	The thing is that the Nazgul simply weren't particularly powerful. I mean, what power did they actually have? They carry swords, have nasty voices and that's pretty much it. Also they have a surprisingly high amount of weaknesses - fire, water and the very name of Elbereth. Heck, Aragorn by himself drove off five of them with a torch. He was able to make them flee without even drawing steel. The Nazgul are somewhat like terrorists; the paranoia, uncertainty and overall psychological effect associated with them are in many ways more powerful than the actual beings themselves. __________________ 'Dangerous!' cried Gandalf. 'And so am I, very dangerous: more dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought alive before the seat of the Dark Lord.'

02-20-2008, 05:27 PM	#3
William Cloud Hicklin Loremaster of Annúminas Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2,330	Well, let's not underestimate the value of fear as a weapon. Tolkien understood this thoroughly, having survived the Somme. When he spoke of Gondor's men under the Nazguls' wings going fetal, 'thinking only of crawling and hiding, and of death,' I'm sure he had seen that very thing, and probably experienced a touch of it himself. Napoleon described battle as 'two large groups of men trying to frighten each other.' And of course Boney knew exactly what he was talking about. A battle is not won by killing everyone on the other side (usually only a small percentage get killed)- but rather inflicting so much punishment on them that their morale- that complex of factors involving discipline, training, tactical position, loyalty, esprit-de-corps etc etc etc, gives way to the basic instinct for self-preservation. You win by making the other side give up. The so-called 'Third Generation' of board wargames began to incorporate this understanding back in the 1970s; units had a 'morale factor' which could be raised or lowered by various things, and when reduced to a certain point retreat, rout or surrender ensued. Many, many times I would have loved to have a couple of 'morale-killer' units which did no physical harm, but simply hit every enemy within range with a -5 morale penalty. And that's just what the Nazgul were. __________________ The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.