Subject: Let's see...
Author:
Posted on: 2013-10-13 03:43:00 UTC
I'd have to say the Rancor has the edge. It has claws and is bigger. The cave troll is comparatively small and can't pierce the Rancor's hide with his blunt nails. The cave troll is built to fight smaller creatures than itself.
Which one of these two monsters do you think would win in a fight to the death?
Jabba's Rancor or the Cave Troll from FOTR?
As with last time, please have a good and reasonable argument to back up your answer. Look at the combatants' various strengths and weaknesses. And be polite. I want this to be a civil debate.
Dune Sand Worm versus Mass Effect Thresher Maw.
There's only one way to find out...
FIGHT!!!!!
(Yeah, so I've apparently watched too much Harry Hill's TV Burp, but hey.)
The Thresher Maw's rough size of 60-90 meters in length gives it a severe size disadvantage to the sandworm, which is reportedly 400 meters long when full-grown. However, the sandworms are not built for speed or maneuverability, preferring to dig around while the thresher maw can move very quickly and with great force if it's in a location that allows it to burrow. Since the sandworm would be less-than maneuverable in a place consisting of solid and impassable material, and the fight would be very boring as the two creatures flail and coil rather than actually engaging in combat, the fight would need to take place in a location where they could both burrow.
Since the sandworm's main method of prey location involves detecting and following vibration, it would be safe to say that the thresher maw's movement could be easily followed, due to its aggressive movement and almost seismic method of locomotion. Thus, most of the battle would take place underground, where the thresher maw has the advantage of speed, but loses its preferred attack method of thrusting itself aboveground and using its body mass against the opponent. Still, its belowground speed and physical power essentially makes up for that, and it would be just as able to find its opponent as the sandworm would, since it possesses a similar vibration-based detection system, so the sandworm wouldn't be able to change directions and come at it from a different angle without it noticing.
However, the sandworm is very difficult to entirely destroy. The only ways to kill them permanently involve attacking the spread-out vital segments(The wiki says that the humans killed them by applying electricity to each segment at once, so sandworms may be able to change which segments are most vital, or regenerate, or something of the sort. It wasn't very clear.), which the thresher maw may not have the capacity for, nucleic weaponry, which would kill the thresher maw as well, or introducing it to water. I have no idea how the water kills it, as the wikis only say something along the lines of "The water, upon entering the sandworm's body, fatally accelerates its metabolism", so I'm not sure whether it would be an easy kill for the thresher to just aim in the sandworm's open mouth. Possibly not, because of the pH difference between water and any sort of fast-acting acid, but it bears consideration nonetheless.
They balance this out with a rather small offensive capability. They have their teeth, yes, but since their mouths are structured in a trifoil formation with inward-facing jawlines, they aren't exactly able to bite anything; their mouths are more suited to swallowing objects whole and letting their furnace-like digestive system deal with the details, which won't exactly work on the threshers. Not only would the thresher maw be able to see, or rather feel, it coming, the sandworms' mouths aren't large enough to swallow a full-grown thresher, especially if it's fighting to get away. In fact, even if it did manage to swallow the thresher, blood or other circulatory fluid is close enough to water that it can give the worms trouble, and be just as fatal in quantities above a few random humans that get caught in a truck the worm swallowed when it surface. The thresher would have enough blood to kill the sandworm outright, assuming it's chemically akin to blood on Earth, which usually stays at around 7.4 pH. If the blood isn't similar enough, however, the thresher's body would be so lodged in the worm's system that it would very likely end up strangling its digestive system the creature, which would end the fight in a draw.
Overall, however, I'm giving the thresher maw the win here. The sandworm would be hard to kill, but it could still be incapacitated and eventually worn down, while the sandworm simply doesn't have the right kind of offensive capacity to take out a full-grown thresher. A thresher maw, on the other hand, is enormously powerful offensively, and, while not as defensively powerful as the sandworms, it would still be able to take a lot more punishment than the sandworm can give it. It would be a very long fight, since it's a battle between two resilient behemoths instead of smaller and quicker beings, but I still say the thresher wins out at the end.
Admittedly, I'm not terribly proficient in either fandom; I got the information here from wiki-trawling and from reading a few of the Dune books a while back, so I could easily have missed something important to tip the scales one way or the other. Anyone have any corrections to make?
My one issues is that you seem to have assumed the pH of water to be its primary means of harming sandworms. Given that the creatures exist in very dry environments and water kills them by "accelerating [their] metabolism", I think that any electrolyte or solvent would have a similar effect. Furthermore, if they are evolved for fast water uptake, they would likely have a difficult time of preventing something like Thresher acid from entering their systems. Doesn't really change the outcome, but it probably tips the odds further in favor of the Maw.
...have a video of a nigh-invulnerable death machine get curbstomped by the Queen Mother of all Thresher Maws.
Slight Mass Effect 3 spoilers.
I'd have to say the Rancor has the edge. It has claws and is bigger. The cave troll is comparatively small and can't pierce the Rancor's hide with his blunt nails. The cave troll is built to fight smaller creatures than itself.
You do make some good points, admittedly, but I think you are missing some key things.
1) The Rancor has long, thin fingers attached to its claws. Easy to grip. Easy to break.
2) The Cave Troll knows how to use tools (aka weapons). It has been known to use its chain, a large club, and a spear.
3) The Rancor is not a fast creature. The Cave Troll is much faster.
4) The Cave Troll has a thick hide. Arrows and swords weren't able to effectively damage it. The Rancor's claws are likely not as sharp as an arrow or sword.
Advantage: Cave Troll
-Phobos
I'm not sure what effect arrows and swords have on it, but the rancor's skin can absorb blaster bolts.
I liken tough skin to something that most of us, I think, are familiar with: chain mail. Chain mail was invented to stop a select group of weapons that were causing no end of trouble for people with inferior armor. Swords and, to some extent, arrows fall under that category. Chain mail is very effective protection against a sword.
The problem with chain mail is that it is not rigid, like plate armor (which was invented to fix this problem). It is flexible, like skin. So, if someone comes along with a big club, the chain mail (tough skin) will be fine and not break. The same cannot be said for the bones beneath the chain mail/tough skin. The best weapon against chain mail is a mace or other blunt instrument.
Now, to get back to the debate at hand. The Rancor and Cave Troll both have tough skin. That means that claws and, to some extent) teeth are much less effective against both of them. It was brought up that the Rancor has claws, and it seems to have sharp teeth. Therefore, the Cave Troll's tough skin is an effective defense. On the other hand, the Cave Troll has blunt nails and a small mouth with blunt teeth (making it possibly herbivorous?). It uses clubs, chains, and spears, at the least, to fight. So, the Rancor's tough skin is a far less effective defense.
Consider this, a blow from the Cave Troll's club to the Rancor's knee (or elbow/back/neck/ankle/wrist for that matter) which is large and at the perfect level for the Troll to smash it, would be devastating to the Rancor's ability to fight. A blow from the Rancor's claws would need to hit a small, vital area (the eyes for example) to have the same hindering effect.
As for blaster bolts...I think it is safe to assume that a sword is less damaging than a blaster.
-Phobos, bringing a Cave Troll to a knife fight
Why is the Cave Troll allowed to use blunt weaponry in this scenario, while the Rancor is not? I realize that the Rancor has claws on the ends of its fingers, but that's a comparatively small advantage considering that, as you said, claws that will not penetrate the thick hide of the Cave Troll that are situated on the thin and easy-to-potentially-damage fingers of the Rancor make for a small, if not near-negligible, advantage.
However, the Cave Troll, when allowed to use its choice of blunt weapons, will almost certainly have a sizable tactical advantage, especially if it's a smart enough Troll to take advantage of how top-heavy the Rancor is and swing those blunt and heavy weapons at its knees, which as you said, are perfectly within its reach given the size differential between the two creatures.
The Cave Troll is still capable of fighting the Rancor without its club, but it would lose a bit of its fighting prowess without it, due to a necessity to change its usual combat style of "swing whatever's in your hand at the opponent". It's debatable whether that decrease would give the Rancor something of an unfair advantage itself, but we can't remove all of the factors or we'll have two of the same creature going against each other.
This would have to take place in a very dark environment due to the fact that LOTRverse Trolls turn to stone when exposed to sunlight.