Who knows? Tolkien changed his mind on this, and it's not entirely clear what was 'final'.
Ahh, it's good to have someone else that speaks the language.
When Tolkien decided Morgoth shouldn't have the ability to create life, the Orcs became corrupted elves and the Balrogs became fallen Maiar.
And all the early text where it mentioned balrogs were rewritten as 'trolls', which in D&D terms are better thought of as ogres than the leathery long nosed green skinned regenerating things of D&D.
At one point in the 50s, Tolkien decided on '3 or at most 7' Balrogs total, but this was never incorporated into any of the 'Silmarillion' texts, so was it his final decision? Who knows?
It is implied Feanor and the other 'advance' parties of the Noldor host are attacked by more than 3 Balrogs in the most stable copies of the text. How many is 'many' is a matter of debate. When I read the text I imagined 1 or 2 dozen, in part because those sorts of numbers for me better explain Morgoth having drawn off a large portion of the Ainur host to his cause. If we don't imagine several dozen Balrogs, we start having problems with assigning roles for the sort of numbers of Ainur vassals Morgoth presumably has, not only his own, but those he drew from Aule and other sources as well.
But yeah, once we get into Tolkien's later years, Tolkien begins attacking the underpinnings of almost all of his early assumptions (and reducing the quality of his story). I think Orson Scott Card is a parallel case. Both authors I think become emotionally burdened by the seriousness with which their fans begin taking their fiction, and being deeply religious persons both begin to question whether their text is teaching the right lessons. Fortunately, Tolkien left his masterpiece alone: we could be in a situation like OSC where he knocks holes in his own stories with his own stories. For that matter, I'm beginning to feel that Star Wars is in a similar position, with later writings about the beloved setting undermining the originals again and again.
Sauron is less powerful without the ring, but he has a physical form at the time of LOTR in the books (though not in the movies).
I'm aware of that, but nonetheless, that form is a weakened, injured version of his former self, which he can only fully restore if he recovers the ring. Some of his former selves have probably died unrecoverably. He can probably never again assume the form of the Lord of Gifts that he tricked Celebrimbor with. His form of the Dark Lord of the Tower or of the Necromancer, while physical is still not I think equivalent to high epic level. Epic perhaps, but not high epic.
I'd argue that Galadriel is higher level than Glorfindel. She and Feanor are "the greatest of the Eldar of Valinor".
It's an interesting question as to whether Galadriel is a higher level than Gandalf. Certainly they are at the least peers. I would tend to go with the interpretation that Galadriel is higher level than Gandalf, but roughly equivalent once you account for Gandalf's level adjustments from race or template. Whether she is higher level than Glorfindel is an even more difficult question, because it depends on how you think of 'greatest'. In D&D terms, greatest is usually understood to be the ability to win a fight.
But if that is your standard, that would make Eonwe, the greatest warrior of Aman, higher level than most of the Valar. Tolkien tends to define 'greatest' in terms of authority. It's heavily implied that most of Sauron's power comes from his misused but still inherent authority. For example, the biggest problem in overthrowing Sauron using the ring would be that, given his inherent authority, and given that he is the rightful owner of the ring, if he asked you to give him his ring you'd be pretty much compelled to do so unless you had great authority yourself or had trained your will to be a weapon and made yourself cruel and hard.
I would tend to in D&D terms put Glorfindel higher level than Galadriel. He is a guy who afterall can slay Balors on his own as an act of prowess, and by similar means drive off the Nine. But the magic of Galadriel suggests she has more authority than Glorfindel has, and thus can more easily make the universe bend to her will especially at a distance. Exactly what she is capable of doing though isn't entirely clear. Like Elrond, she seems to be a potent artificer, and appears to have considerable magic, but we don't get to see a lot of it. In 5e terms, much of what she and Elrond can do seems to be best described as Lair powers. Gandalf as I've described him is level adjusted about 11th level, but limited to 6th level caster ability. By that standard, Elrond and Galadriel are both about 11th level as well, probably multi-classed. Glorfindel is probably about 15th level. However, this just shows the limitations of trying to apply game concepts to literature that wasn't created to conform to game concepts, and something that expressly appalled Tolkien when people tried to do so.
