[The Saucepan Man]

Well, Sauron was not at the height of his powers, but I don't think that the ring has different levels of power. I believe that it is always at the same level. I think it was just as dangerous as it ever was and just as desirable.

Fair enough, Willie. I did not express it very well. But the Ring's power does vary, both in response to its Master's increasing power and in response to its proximity to Mordor. For example, it is Sauron's increasing power that causes it to abandon Gollum after some 500 years. As Gandalf says:

So now, when its master was awake once more and sending out his dark thought from Mirkwood, it abandoned Gollum.

I always imagine the Ring to be a much more dangerous object at the time of Frodo's tenure as Ringbearer than at the time Bilbo was in possession of it. Bilbo's use of the Ring in the Hobbit has markedly less effect on him than it does on Frodo, when he uses it. I know that the idea of the Ring was not really developed when the Hobbit was written, but the concept works nevertheless. The Ring's effects on its bearer become much more marked with Sauron's growing power, and also the nearer the Ring comes to its Master and the fires in which it was forged. Sam experiences this in the Tower of Cirith Ungol:

As it drew near the great furnaces where, in the depths of time, it had been shaped and forged, the Ring's power grew, and it became more fell, untameable save by some mighty will.

Dain, you said:

As for the ring, I always saw it having somewhat of a will of it's own, probably because lots of Sauron is wrapped up in it, and so it can actively play tricks and lose itself or be found or call evil things to it, but it can't really make it's owner do anything specific, only corrupt him.

That, for me, is spot on. Gandalf makes the point that it is trying to get back to its Master, and this is why it slips its bearer at various points. And no, it can't directly force its bearer to do anything specific, but acts on its bearer's mind, trying to seize on perceived weaknesses, to make him act in a certain way. In particular, it seeks to make its bearer use it in such a way so as to make itself more apparent to its Master and his servants, for example by wearing it.

The analogy with a drug is a good one, since it can almost have a hallucinatory effect on its bearer's mind. We can see this most markedly when Sam wears the Ring:

The world changed, and a single moment of time was filled with an hour of thought. At once he was aware that hearing was sharpened while sight was dimmed ... All things about him were not dark but vague; while he himself was there in a grey hazy world, alone like a small black solid rock, and the Ring, weighing down his left hand was like an orb of hot gold.

Then, later, in the Tower of Cirith Ungol:

As Sam stood there, even though the Ring was not on him but hanging by its chain about his neck, he felt himself enlarged, as if he were robed in a huge distorted shadow of himself ... Already the Ring tempted him, gnawing at his will and reason. Wild fantasies arose in his mind; and he saw Samwise the Strong, Hero of the Age, striding with flaming sword across the darkened land, and armies flocking to his call as he marched to the overthrow of Barad-Dur. And then all the clouds rolled away, and the white sun shone, and at his command the vale of Gorgoroth became a garden of flowers and trees and brought forth fruit. He had only to put on the Ring and claim it as his own, and all this could be.

Very trippy! These passages, I think, best reflect the effect of the Ring on the bearer at the time when it is at the height of its powers, in the sense that Sauron's might is at its greatest since the Last Alliance and the Ring is as close to him and to its place of birth as it has been since then. And Sam was not even wearing the Ring when it sought to tempt him to seize it as his own.

But, as Dain pointed out, this thread is really about the effect on the Ring on those who do not touch it. That Boromir was the first of the Fellowship to succumb is not surpring, and the reasons have been explained in a number of posts above. But I still think that it could have corrupted any of them given sufficient time, and particularly the nearer they came to Mordor. And I get the sense that the Hobbits would have been the last to succumb, given their particular resilience to it.

Which brings me back to Smeagol/Gollum again, and to the question of why he succumbed so quickly, which I don't think has been fully explained yet. Yes, Willie, I agree that Smeagol/Gollum is particularly corrupted by it as its bearer and less able to give it up than the likes of Bilbo, because he came by it by murder. But that does not explain why he committed the murder in the first place, having practically just set eyes upon it.

It is said that Smeagol was a Stoor. But Stoors were Hobbits. As the prologue to LotR explains:

Before crossing the mountains the Hobbits had already become divided into three somewhat different breeds: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides.

In fact, Gandalf guesses that his people were "of the hobbit-kind: akin to the fathers of the fathers of the Stoors". And I think that we can take Gandalf's guess as pretty accurate.

Willie, you said:

I think that a big part of it was because of Smeagol himself. He was sort of the curious and greedy type. But I think an even bigger part of it was his knowledge of the ring. What did Smeagol know about the ring? Nothing. No one told him of the ring and its dangers or risks. It just happened to cross his path. So, the ring takes full advantage of his personal faults and his complete ignorance of the ring.

Well, Gandalf describes Smeagol as the "most inquisitive and curious-minded" of his family (which was a family of high repute amongst his folk). And greed is suggested by the fact that he is said to have murdered Deagol for the Ring "because it looked so bright and beautiful". But nowhere is it suggested that he was particularly evil or malicious before taking possession of the Ring.

I am still puzzled as to how a being of the Hobbit-kind, even an inquisitive and (possibly) greedy one, can be moved to murder his friend almost the instant he sees the Ring, simply because it is "bright and beautiful". The only explanation that I can think of is that his kind were less resistant to the Ring than Hobbits later became. But that to me is not a wholly adequate explanation. Does anyone have any further thoughts?