I also don't particularly like the Last Alliance spell. Regarding Vingilot, I never looked at it like the ACTUALY Vingilot, just an illusion which gives strength and hope to its allies. For Gorthaur, at least Sauron didn't directly die, and could conceivably have had time to recover if given long enough.
While the spell is in action, I guess the very Vingilótë does appear in the battlefield, as you can also manoeuvre it and the actual model of the ship exactly says that it's Eärendil's enchanted vessel. But even if that weren't the case, the light of Eärendil would never display itself in such fashion (as its only radiant fragment on Middle-earth is captured in Galadriel's phial, and the Mariner won't come down to Arda until the End). Regarding Sauron, he did die in a sense, as his physical body was destroyed by the cataclysm caused by the wrath of Ilúvatar; any Maia who is violently deprived of its physical appearance will inevitably face the loss of some of its powers too. It's quite an inevitable law of Arda, and Tolkien made it very clear that Sauron could have never recovered and retrieved his past might again (particularly, the ability of shape-shifting at a major extent and the ability to appear in a very fair form). That is, the spell is nonetheless a clear violation of the lore, and there is not something more to add about it, in my opinion.
Nevertheless, again, I am not questioning these spells' accuracy towards the lore, because it's already proven that they don't respect it and similar arguments of this kind would thus not contribute meaningfully to the debate either. As long as such spells are in the game, any lore-boundary can't be applied to them in that strict way (and I already explained why, as ultimate spells, they have the possibility to go beyond the logic that is legitimately followed for the other spells and the other elements of the game).
If we just pull back mortal characters and revive them from death, then why is it fair to cherry pick them? There was a truly excellent proposal some time ago, which is still buried in the Rohan suggestions board, to give Rohan a new Ring mechanic in the form of Eorl the Young. This was shot down purely because Eorl was dead at the time of the Third Age. So why is it fair for the Dwarves to revive Durin the Deathless, or Durin I, and not for Rohan to revive Eorl the Young? That is one of the major problems I have with the concept, it seems like it is ruled by favouritism rather than fairness. I would prefer to at least keep the content of the mod somewhat in the Third Age, rather than having 2nd and 1st age stuff thrown willy nilly throughout, for uniformities sake.
I wouldn't call it favouritism, but rather a free choice among different valuable options. In fact, once the lore-logic is not valid anymore in such terms, I think you only have to decide, based on every situation's specificity, whether it should be wise to stick to a solid concept that doesn't create any problematics as the ones above or to go boldly for a very unique feature that adds greatness to the game (at the cost of timeline or lore contradictions). For example, Gondor and Rohan stick wisely to lore-accurate concepts as there is a wide range of possibilities for them to choose from, related specifically to the War of the Ring and to the content of the cinematographic trilogy; factions as Lothlórien and Rivendell aren't that lucky to dispose of such chances, so that it's necessarily required to seek for the 'bold choices' I referred to above (in this context, their relative ultimate spells).
Just imagine, in Imladris' case, would there really be suitable alternative choices other than the current spell? A new ultimate spell that perfectly respects the lore and the timeline could be easily conceived, but that will ultimately lead to the Last Alliance spell to be removed from the game; a spell that is magnificently related to the Eldar's glorious past and to the LOTR prologue everyone is fond of. Uniqueness is exactly one of the greatest aspects of this Mod, and if clever exceptions as the Last Alliance and Power of Past Ages were not anymore, unique it would not be. This is my personal consideration of the matter.
By the way, I checked that
thread of Eorl the Young (if this is the one you mentioned) and I honestly find the comparison a bit inappropriate. First of all, the thread is not technically shut down, as there is just a comment from Tiberius that uses the same logic (wrong, in this case) of the impossibility to revive dead heroes. Second, the proposal is linked to the One Ring, while, as I stated from the beginning, this one has nothing to do with it; in that situation, I would have rejected that concept for the fact that Eorl is resurrected via the action of a totally evil artefact (the same argument against Durin as a Ring hero).
As the current Moderator, I tell you that you can develop that proposal further, if you are willing to. In regards of Eorl the Young being implemented via the spellbook, my response would use the logic of the 'wise choice' I illustrated before: Rohan had better stick to its current concept, because both the lore and the actual films provide us with completely accurate material to work with and to develop unique concepts from (while Eorl would then disrupt every of those aspects more than it could benefit the game itself). Therefore, based on Rohan's particularities, I would absolutely agree with you about the timeline and the lore. The Dwarves, Imladris, Lothlórien and Mordor just have different standards though
EDIT:
I liked him, so I said yes, but if I am to be honest, I prefer to have Durin only in a palantir power because he is dead loooooooooooong before the Third Age, or not at all like now.
After all if Edain Team made him available like a Dwarf Ring Hero, Why do they not make/add Gil-Galad a hero for Imladris with Celebrimbor, Celebrian, The first Glorfindel, Fëanor... The Numenorean kingdom with Ciryatur, Isildur or Elendil for Arnor... Gothmog the King of the Balrog, Glaurung the Father of Dragons, Draugluin the Father of Werewolf, Morgoth, Ungoliant...
The answer is quite simple : All of these people/creatures are long dead before the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
I really suggest you read again the previous passages of the debate (if you haven't done it), because I personally think you're making now a bit of confusion about the matters involved and the relative arguments. It's quite clear that we can't have Morgoth, the Valar or the whole First Age in the game, and I exactly spent some time in explaining my reasoning and this concept's specificity very carefully. It would thus be desirable if you had a look at them and remained in touch with the discussion.
So stop whining about not Durin being in the game lads and deal with it and move on.
This thread was exactly established to deal more specifically with the current Durin issue. If you are not interested, you are free to not participate and getting yourself involved in other activities elsewhere. If you are willing to argue your legitimate opposite position though, you should then do it with actual and real criticism; pointless remarks like the one I quoted are generally more than worthy of being simply deleted for the sake of the very topic. If you want to discuss, do it properly, please.