Did Sauron really need the ring?

[Balrog_of_Morgoth]

Sometimes I like to wonder what it may have been like if Sauron had never made the One Ring. If he had never deceived the elves of Hollin and allowed Celebrimbor to become skilled enough to fashion the three.

It is hard to imagine Middle-Earth standing up to Sauron and obtaining victory even with him not having the rings and the nazgul, etc. In fact, his goal of victory may have been even easier to obtain. There would be no great power in Rivendell or Lothlorien, and Gandalf's power would have remained un-enhanced. Who would have stood in his way?

Obviously, he would never have been vanqished during the Last Alliance, for no ring could have been cut from him. His power would remain his.

Saruman may not have become corrupt with no ring lore to lust after, and no One Ring itself to covet. Gandalf and a true of heart Saruman may have been able to pose somewhat of a threat to Sauron, but it probably would have been a non-issue, because I think Sauron would have conquered all by early in the third age if not sooner.

Any thoughts?

[Silverleaf]

didn't most of his power come from the One Ring?

[Balrog_of_Morgoth]

Only after he poured the greater part of his own power into it when he forged the ring.

My point was that if his policy had been one of brute force mixed with a little bit of strategy, he had little need for the ring. He could have taken out all his enemies one by one, with no chance of being "separated" from his power.

[Silverleaf]

oh ya...
Well it might be as alot of morals in stories that "bad guys" are cowards.He wanted the ring to use as a sure way to win, or more like a way to attack from the back so least chance of dieing since they didn't have guns..
If he didn't have the ring he could have been killed by someone in the Last Alliance clan(if infact he didn't just use his Orcs to fight for him) by an arrow or if by chance someone got close enough to stab him. Either way he still would die.
Namárië

[markedel]

I think it's more then that-Sauron's ability to dominate wills was very strong-but for Sauron to dominate Arda he'd need something more-Sauron may have started off good again in the early second age, with a plan to create magical rings of power to help cure Arda, repair etc. But he went bad quickly, but still stuck to his original plan in his use of rings, but the aims became perverted.

[IronParrot]

I think the Ring was a very successful "last resort" survival device on Sauron's part, as demonstrated by, well, the entirety of The Lord of the Rings...

[Dunadan]

Definitely. Sauron used the rings to enslave the other races; that was the plan. Celebrimbor managed to save the Three, but even then they could not be used openly against him.

Given that the Numenoreans and the Last Alliance both managed to gub him, the latter with him having the Ring on, it seems that it was a very successful strategy without which he would've been vanquished sooner.

Though, I just thought of something else. If he hadn't made the Ring, it wouldn't have been possible for him to be so utterly defeated (unless the Valar intervened and had him ejected into the Void with Melkor).

[Balrog_of_Morgoth]

Yes, that was my thinking. Plus the three could not have been made without Sauron's help. The remaining Elves likely would have faded away and left for Valinor.

Sauron's problem was the same as Morgoth's. Impatience. The one time he did show patience, he brought down the most powerful race and force this side of the hosts of the War of Wrath. (Numenor). He could have done the same with everyone else. Pick his fights rather than let everyone join forces.

And, towards the end of the War of the Ring, he was still too powerful in the end for Gandalf the White, the sword reforged, and the sons of Elrond without having the ring. They would have faced utter defeat but not for his blindness regarding frodo and the ring going to Mt. Doom. Consider them dealing with a "whole" Sauron, and no Rivendell or Lothlorien to back them up with the power of the three rings.

[durin's bane]

I think he needed the Ring. Sauron's goal was to enslave the entire Middle-earth and become all powerful and stuff, and he couldn't have done so without the Ring.

[Balrog_of_Morgoth]

I suppose he needed the ring if since that was his goal. But I'm saying he didn't need that goal or the ring to do so. He could have taken everybody out to the point of submission without the ring, never having to risk losing the vast majority of his power. His strategy was all greed, no brains.

[Falagar]

I suppose he needed the ring if since that was his goal. But I'm saying he didn't need that goal or the ring to do so. He could have taken everybody out to the point of submission without the ring, never having to risk losing the vast majority of his power. His strategy was all greed, no brains.

Now, was it? He had a fairly big chance o fwinning! How could he have guessed that someone should try to destroy the Ring, or that even if they did, how could they accomplish it? In his own land with
He would have won, if it hadn't been for Gollum, a lot of luck, and four Hobbits, two men, a Dwarf, an Elf and a Maia!

The Dwarven kingdoms would perhaps still be united, he wouldn't (as you mentioned) have the Nine, and he would infact have died in the Last Alliance battle.

[gimli7410]

i think saruman would eventually give up though and join sauron and maybe gandalf would im not sure

[azalea]

Don't you think the elves would have still been in ME? I don't think they would have faded/ left yet, because the task wouldn't have been completed yet. They were needed to help, whether they knew it or not.
I think Sauron could still have been defeated, but it would have taken everything the world had to do it, and it may not have been as complete a victory. It would have to have been Sauron v. the Istari, with the help of the Children. They could not defeat him utterly w/ out the help of the Istari, but with them it could be done, IMO. The ring actually made it easier in a way to defeat him.

[Balrog_of_Morgoth]

The Elves may have stayed, but without Nenya and Vilya they would have had no power to stop the fading. There would have been no safe havens to speak of for taking counsel and regrouping.

Someone said he still would have won without his enemies being lucky and but for gollum. If there was no ring, he would not even have this "luck" to worry about. Even if he was defeated, according to the logic of the past, he could re-form and attack again, even if it wasn't immediately. He was defeated by Huan, but fled and regrouped. He was vanquished in the fall of Numenor and simply wove himself a dark shape. He would have regrouped much faster after his defeat during the last alliance, and been close to full power, not just a shadow of himself. Gil-Galad and Elendil would be dead. There would be no resistance unless Gandalf and Saruman arrived in time, but then there would be no forces left for the Istari to move to great deeds.

[Insidious Rex]

I thought the whole point was world domination. he wanted every thing on earth to worship him. he couldnt do that even with his great power. he showed in Numenor that he was at best a powerful trickster who monkied around with the heads of important people and screwed everything up that way. But the rings allowed him to amplify his influential power and with them he COULD achieve strong enough influence to control everything. Remember: One Ring to rule them all....

[#1GaMGeeGuRL]

No because without the One Ring Sauron would have just died in the battle. But no his spirit survived because most of his power was in the ring. Kind of like insurance. If someone already made this point I apologize. I was up all night and don't feel like reading the whole thing.

[Insidious Rex]

Originally posted by #1GaMGeeGuRL
No because without the One Ring Sauron would have just died in the battle. But no his spirit survived because most of his power was in the ring. Kind of like insurance.

Forgive me but was this in response to my point I made or just an answer to the thread question? If it was for me then I gotta disagree because The One Ring wasnt made as an insurance policy in case he drowned. It was made specifically TO RULE THEM ALL like it says. And the benefit of being tied to the ring was incidental.

If it was an answer to the thread question then it doesnt really make sense since your whole point is that NOT having the ring would have sealed his fate whereas having the ring allowed him to stay alive.

If someone already made this point I apologize. I was up all night and don't feel like reading the whole thing.

Oh one of those nights eh

[#1GaMGeeGuRL]

OK sometimes (espeacially now) when I say things they don't really make sense but here: I don't think it was incidental he was tied to the Ring. I think that was half the point. But we're all entitled to our own interpretations.

[LeniFreak]

I'm leaving the other rings out of the equation here—although I agree they had an effect on the enslavement of peoples—and just honing in on the immediate effects of the Ring. I think that the actual existence of the Ring--the physical embodiment of his powers--served as a way to further focus and intensify his powers. So without the One Ring, Sauron's powers are more far-reaching but also more scattered; less focused on the immediate goal. However, such a physical "storage space" for his power did create the problem that it might be transferred to another person. So, without the One Ring his powers are less focused—but there is less—or no—chance of physical removal of them.

[Elf Girl]

Even supposing that the Elves did grow skilful enough to create the Seven, the Nine, and the Three, Sauron could not have control of those rings without the One.