Why Harry Potter couldn't defeat Voldemort discussion thread. [Archive]

Lex-Kat

2008-09-01, 02:13 PM

Quoted form Admiral Kelly's previous thread:

Without the use of a Deus Ex Machina (or Chekov's Gun, which does not make it any less of a cop-out) Harry cannot defeat Voldemort. Let us review:

Book 1: Harry used the 'power of love' and a trick from Dumbledore to defeat Voldemort.
Book 2: Fawkes came just when things were at their worst.
Book 3: No Voldemort.
Book 4: The stupid twin Phoenix wands.
Book 5: Harry does overcome Voldemort mentally, but only 'wins' because
Book 6: No Voldemort.
Book 7: Wands act completely differently then anything ever said or done before, to the point where Harry convinces Voldemort's wand to backfire on him.

This does not include the fact he survived the Adava Kedavra twice - a spell which a wizard is suppose to be undefended against except by running out of the way.

So I ask my fellow playgrounders this question: Is there any conceivable way Harry could have beaten Voldemort in a one on one match each armed with a wand and no extraordinary circumstances of any sort such as the ones listed above?

This is a discussion thread. NOT a vs. thread. Thank you.

Eerie

2008-09-01, 02:59 PM

So I ask my fellow playgrounders this question: Is there any conceivable way Harry could have beaten Voldemort in a one on one match each armed with a wand and no extraordinary circumstances of any sort such as the ones listed above?

No.

It is kind of the POINT of the book. "Good defeats evil", not "superior firepower defeats inferior firepower".

Fri

2008-09-01, 03:04 PM

No. The only wizard in voldemort's power level is dumbledore. And even he prefer to use stealth and crafty tactics. Dumbly is the strongest good magician in the modern world. And for some reason even he can't/won't fight voldemort straight.

Harry is what? A student? There's tons of better wizard than he. Even a mid/low rank auror is better than him in magical power.

Gaelbert

2008-09-01, 03:12 PM

DomaDoma

2008-09-01, 03:13 PM

No.

It is kind of the POINT of the book. "Good defeats evil", not "superior firepower defeats inferior firepower".

This. And much more succinctly than I was going to put it.

Also: Chekhov's Gun is more or less by definition less of a cop-out than a deus ex machina.

warty goblin

2008-09-01, 03:36 PM

[B][SIZE="4"]
So I ask my fellow playgrounders this question: Is there any conceivable way Harry could have beaten Voldemort in a one on one match each armed with a wand and no extraordinary circumstances of any sort such as the ones listed above?

Well, if I were Harry, I would go about the problem in the following ways.

1) Publically challenge Voldemort to a duel.

2) Get Hermione/Dumbledore to help me create a spell that transfigures dirt into a main battle tank.

3) Arrive at dueling grounds, evade Voldemort's spells, create main battle tank.

4) Load Cannister.

5) Aim

6) Fire

7) ???

8) Profit

Short of similar cheese I don't see how it could be done though.

Oslecamo

2008-09-01, 05:25 PM

I've always thought the whole deal about the power of love and that cliched nonsense was ridiculous. What Voldemort needed was a nice gun, a revolver. Voldy was born into the Muggle world, he could have realized that.

You're forgeting that when the matter is Harry potter, Voldy's brain shrinks to subatomic level.

Minion:Congratulations, my lord, you have sucessfully taken over the wizard government, leaving your path to supreme power and world domination open.

Voldemort:Yes, but first, I need to take care of Harry Potter.

Minion:My lord, please let us expendable minions take care of him.

Voldemort:No! I'll kill him with my own wand!

Minion:My lord, with all due respect, you already tried that twice and your wand backfired both times for some unknown reason. With great prejudice for your evilness Maybe you could give us a chance of killing the kid, instead of risking your own neck!

Voldemort:Nonsense! I'll be the one killing the boy who lived!

Minion:So, at least, my lord, could try to kill Potter with some other mean than avadra kedrava? Since it never seems to work on him?

Voldemort:O'rlly?(kills minion)

What really annoys me it's that it isn't a unique case. Every time Voldy tries to kill Harry with the killing curse something goes horribly wrong. He should be smart enough to try something new by the 7th book's ending.

Texas_Ben

2008-09-01, 05:57 PM

And for some reason even he can't/won't fight voldemort straight.

If I recall correctly, the one time voldy and dumbledore fought it out, Dumbledore more than held his own.

Fri

2008-09-01, 06:05 PM

Ah yeah. Now I remember. Can someone refresh my memory on why dumbledore never simply blast voldemort with his awesome magic power?

CrazedGoblin

2008-09-01, 06:13 PM

Evil DM Mark3

2008-09-01, 06:17 PM

This. And much more succinctly than I was going to put it.

Also: Chekhov's Gun is more or less by definition less of a cop-out than a deus ex machina.

A Chekhov's Gun is more of less by definition not a cop-out at all.

freerangetroll

2008-09-01, 06:21 PM

Ah yeah. Now I remember. Can someone refresh my memory on why dumbledore never simply blast voldemort with his awesome magic power?

Somebody correct me if I am wrong because it has been a while. Basically nobody can kill Voldy (at leas permanently) while he has a Horucrux that contains a piece of him still alive or intact. So Dumbledore could have blasted at him until the cows came home with no real result.

Plactus

2008-09-01, 06:44 PM

Ah yeah. Now I remember. Can someone refresh my memory on why dumbledore never simply blast voldemort with his awesome magic power?

Because Harry was a Horcrux. After Thingy used Harry's blood in the resurrection spell in Goblet of Fire, he could hit Harry with the Killing Curse without killing him, but still destroying the piece of his own soul that lived inside Harry. As Thingy was the only one who could do so, Dumbledore wanted to keep him alive until he did, so Harry wouldn't have to die.

Presumably, the reason Dumbledore kept Thingy from killing Harry in Order of the Phoenix was to keep Thingy from realizing how much Dumbledore knew/guessed about him and/or to preserve the mental link between Harry and Thingy.

DraPrime

2008-09-01, 07:31 PM

Somebody correct me if I am wrong because it has been a while. Basically nobody can kill Voldy (at leas permanently) while he has a Horucrux that contains a piece of him still alive or intact. So Dumbledore could have blasted at him until the cows came home with no real result.

Still, almost dead and incorporeal Voldemort is a lot better than a fully powerful Voldermort. It would have at least given Dumbledore more time to get rid of the Horcruxes. And Voldemort wouldn't have been free wreak havoc.

EvilElitest

2008-09-01, 07:48 PM

insanity is trying the same thing again and again and expecting a different result. Voldemort is insane
from
EE

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2008-09-01, 08:25 PM

Evil Elitest has it down straight.

LordVader

2008-09-01, 08:25 PM

No way. Picture Voldemort as the Spartans from 300; even the best Persians can't confront the Spartans head-on, so they have to sneak around back and beat them through tricks. .

Even Dumby couldn't take Voldemort head-on all the time.

Texas_Ben

2008-09-01, 09:30 PM

Because Harry was a Horcrux. After Thingy used Harry's blood in the resurrection spell in Goblet of Fire, he could hit Harry with the Killing Curse without killing him, but still destroying the piece of his own soul that lived inside Harry. As Thingy was the only one who could do so, Dumbledore wanted to keep him alive until he did, so Harry wouldn't have to die.

Presumably, the reason Dumbledore kept Thingy from killing Harry in Order of the Phoenix was to keep Thingy from realizing how much Dumbledore knew/guessed about him and/or to preserve the mental link between Harry and Thingy.
I forgot about the horcruxes. Honestly I only vaguely remember what happened in book 5 and books 6 and 7 were a blur to me, due to the fact that they were bloated with a lot of stuff that did *not* need to be in there. I mean book 7 was basically "they sit in a tent" [/rant].

Anyways I'm going to have to agree with the above rather than dumbledore was incapable of beating voldy in a stand-up fight. I mean voldy is what? in his 50's? 60's? I may be misremembering but isn't Dumbledore implied to be several hundred years of age? Seems to me dumbledore would be able to have tracked down quite a bit more knowledge in his time.

EvilElitest

2008-09-01, 10:02 PM

Evil Elitest has it down straight.

voldemort's motto- If it worked once, try it again......and again....and again. If it doesn't work, just keep trying, your will get it eventually
from
EE

Mr. Scaly

2008-09-01, 11:09 PM

Hey, did they lock the previous thread?

chiasaur11

2008-09-01, 11:34 PM

Hey, did they lock the previous thread?

Yeah, but with a note it was problems with the first poster, not the current form of the thread.

kpenguin

2008-09-01, 11:41 PM

voldemort's motto- If it worked once, try it again......and again....and again. If it doesn't work, just keep trying, your will get it eventually
from
EE

Perhaps Voldemort thought that Potter was like a skull: if you keep bashing it in, it'll eventually give way and all the delicious juice will come out.

...

Coconut. I meant coconut.:smalltongue:

EvilElitest

2008-09-02, 12:05 AM

Perhaps Voldemort thought that Potter was like a skull: if you keep bashing it in, it'll eventually give way and all the delicious juice will come out.

...

Coconut. I meant coconut.:smalltongue:

yeah, certainly. We won't judge you.......nope
from
EE

Dumbledore lives

2008-09-02, 12:17 AM

Voldemort figured that using the killing curse on Harry while he was undefended should have worked. It didn't. I think it should have worked, and Harry should have dies, but that's for a different time. harry is not exactly the brightest bulb in the bunch either. He dove into a freezing cold lake with almost nothing on, with a horcrux on on less. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that is stupid. Without Chekov's gun Harry would have easily lost, he's just not that great of a wizard.

RMS Oceanic

2008-09-02, 09:46 AM

Voldemort is kinda like Xykon: he has a one-track mind and only respects raw magical power. When Harry's wand did the crazy golden thing to Lucius' wand, Voldemort's first reaction was "This wand isn't powerful enough" and went looking for the +5 wand, unlike considering it was maybe Harry himself that was the problem.

Yes, Harry would have lost in a straight, proper duel, but just saying Harry has enough raw power to defeat Voldemort isn't particularly interesting. Some people say Rowling is an average writer, but whatever way you slice it, she's a master plot weaver, and it's these various artifacts of Chekov that makes the story interesting.

Ditto

2008-09-02, 10:56 AM

I was actually quite okay with Harry not dying each of those times (at age 1 and at the end of Book 7), since the power of love gets ONE freebie awesome spotlight moment, and the horcrux thing really did make sense. It didn't make sense why Harry became a horcrux in the first place, but given that he was... it's cool.

I also thought the way the Elder Wand worked in Harry/Thingy's final duel was brilliant and makes everyone happy by killing the bad guy without Harry being nasty (though I think Molly Weasley totally killed Bellatrix...). The big problem THERE is that through a SUDDEN and INEXPLICABLE BURST OF PLOT EXPOSITION, Harry explained the entire lore and changing of hands of the Elder Wand which Voldemort had been trying to figure out for 7 books and most of his adult and evil life. WTW is that all about?

There's no question Voldemort would pants Harry in a straight-up fight.
Dumbledore didn't fight Voldemort because he never came out and made himself available. When he did in book 5, Dumbledore fought him to a standstill... and he ran away. If Dumbledore had actually gone on the offensive, I'd say he would have won decisively.

Beyond that, Snape would be the number 3 magicker. McGonagall is the top witch, so I don't know how that would match vis-a-vis Snape, but add Kingsley in there and you have the top 5 square. Harry is a mediocre wizard (Ron equally so), and it sort of scares me that he/they rise to the top of the Auror office. Book 7 should have been called, "Harry Potter and the Needlessly Long Camping Trip, or How Hermione Wins Again" - so I'm eh on Hermione becoming a bookish lawyer gal when she should be showing off more. :smalltongue:

EvilElitest

2008-09-02, 11:33 AM

logically through, voldemort should have used that evil Fey Fire stuff in that last fight
from
EE

Linkavitch

2008-09-02, 11:35 AM

Well, if I were Harry, I would go about the problem in the following ways.

1) Publically challenge Voldemort to a duel.

2) Get Hermione/Dumbledore to help me create a spell that transfigures dirt into a main battle tank.

3) Arrive at dueling grounds, evade Voldemort's spells, create main battle tank.

4) Load Cannister.

5) Aim

6) Fire

7) ???

8) Profit

Short of similar cheese I don't see how it could be done though.

I like this explanation.

Beholder1995

2008-09-02, 11:52 AM

Rare Pink Leech

2008-09-02, 12:34 PM

No.

It is kind of the POINT of the book. "Good defeats evil", not "superior firepower defeats inferior firepower".

I don't think it's the "good defeats evil" that people are complaining about. It's the "good defeats evil only because good always defeats evil" that feels like a cop out, not "good defeats evil based on its merits".

Haruki-kun

2008-09-02, 12:38 PM

hamishspence

2008-09-02, 12:39 PM

magic and tech do not work well together in potterverse. I'm not sure if transfiguration includes machines. Summon main battle tank, maybe, and even that might be limited by mass: the idea of summoning an aqualung was ruled out because of breach of secret in tournament, but in life and death struggle, anything goes. But time is important: you might get blasted while summoning or changing something.

Ditto

2008-09-02, 02:10 PM

I don't think it's the "good defeats evil" that people are complaining about. It's the "good defeats evil only because good always defeats evil" that feels like a cop out, not "good defeats evil based on its merits".

Very this. Very very this.

I think you could make an argument for such a transfiguration, but you're not going to hit a wizard with a tank shell. Or much of anything in the way of conventional weaponry. Guns might work alright, but military sniping isn't really what we're talking about. We debated this at length in the Sauron vs. Voldemort thread - wizards don't do melee, and are damned hard to attack from range as it is. Rapid apparition makes a sustained battle hard to wage against a wizard as a Muggle attacker.

For Harry Potter, though, it's basically just hide behind your Protego and spam Expelliarmus.

hamishspence

2008-09-02, 02:15 PM

material to material: Summon block of X, (lead would be closest. Transfigure to uranium 235. Boom. More likely V would disapparate and suicide attack would cause huge collateral damage anyway: heroes aren't supposed to do that.

Copacetic

2008-09-02, 02:24 PM

For all we peoples complaining about how Voldemort is determined beyond plausibility to kill Harry himself, you are forgetting that he heard bits and pieces of THE PROPHECYTM which means he believed that only he could kill Harry.

I have also always found the thought of Dumbledore conjuring a revolver and shooting Voldy in the kneecap as amusing, at the very least.

"You are Weak, Dumbledore! Weak! *bam* Argh, my leg! You SoB, what did you do!"

*snort*

warty goblin

2008-09-02, 02:40 PM

That... er... might work, but I doubt Voldemort would respond to being publically challenged to a duel. He just doesn't come off as the type who cares about that sort of thing.

Nah, he'd be all over it like white on rice. He's one big walking mass of ego, look at half of his lines. "I am so much more than a man." the whole dual in book 4, how pissed off he gets in Book 1 when Harry calls Dumbledore the greatest sorcerer in the world, thinking nobody else is smart enough to figure out his Horcruxes, making the Horcruxes out of vaulable and notable things as opposed to a large slab of reinforced concrete buried in an out of the way location, and so on. Challenge him, publically call his snaky ass on the carpet, he'd have no chance.

Also Voldemort's great advantage is in fear. He's managed to turn personal superiority to pretty much every wizard and some skill in subterfuge and skulldudgery into a reign of terror which keeps his enemies off balance, paranoid and most of all, from acting in concert against him. He might be good but he clearly could be taken down by wizards firing en masse, and backed up by anti-disapperation magic- look at how often he needed to dissparate in his duel with Dumbledore, now think of how fast he'd need to move in a fight with a dozen or more wizards using actual squad level tactics. They'd be scraping him off of the ceiling for weeks. He needs to keep his enemies demoralized and panicky, and allowing one kid to humiliate him by challenging him to a dual, then not having the guts to appear would be a real blow to the cause.

edit: doubts have been expressed on the usability of the tank strategy, allow me to expound.

1) On the use of electronics- that's just around Hogwarts or other similarly magically drenched locations. Any such dual would have to occur on neutral ground. Anyway, using Protean charms et cetera one could quite simply engineer an almost entirely magical MBT. The main gun might be a problem, but we've never seen any indication that chemistry fails around magic, since people's brains keep working.

2) On a spell to make it. Such a spell would be difficult, but probably doable. For one thing one doesn't really need the entire MBT, and probably an APC would work, all you really need is enough armor to stop a spell (which is probably reasonably minimal, since they don't seem to go through walls and stuff), and a large enough cannon to reduce your target to confetti

3) On the ability of the MBT to actually kill a wizard. OK, against a wizard with brains it would be difficult, since they could circle strafe the turret, then demon fire the tank. This however is Voldemort, which means that there is a significant chance he's not gonna recognize what the thing is, and even if he does will underestimate it, since it is muggle. Protego blocks stuff yes, but at it's most powerful it seems sufficient to hold two people apart- a load of cannister from an M1 Abrams will reduce most of a wall to rubble, and kill everything behind it.

hamishspence

2008-09-02, 02:46 PM

Actually that was book 2: response "Dumbledore's been driven out of Hogwarts by the memory of me"

But yes, he does tend toward sneakiness over straight fighting. Pity for him he did not apply that to Harry. Imperius on Ron or Hermione or Ginny and Harry would be crippled by being unwilling to attack them.

DomaDoma

2008-09-02, 02:48 PM

I don't think it's the "good defeats evil" that people are complaining about. It's the "good defeats evil only because good always defeats evil" that feels like a cop out, not "good defeats evil based on its merits".

Merits such as, off the top of my head: courage against unreasonable odds, self-sacrifice, regard for those below you in status, loyalty, mercy, friendship, trust...

Yeah, Harry Potter has that.

Swok

2008-09-02, 03:14 PM

I don't have much to supply to this thread other than to state that some of you are vastly underestimating the speed of bullets. Wizards still get hit by their own slower than bullet projectile spells. Certain firearms will hit you before you hear them.

Leigh

2008-09-02, 03:14 PM

Merits such as, off the top of my head: courage against unreasonable odds, self-sacrifice, regard for those below you in status, loyalty, mercy, friendship, trust...

Yeah, Harry Potter has that.

Very true. And for those reasons, Harry can take Voldy. Case closed - Harry would find the strength within himself to fight his archnemesis and defeat him, and Voldermort is evil. Being evil, he would probably follow the typical stereotype of evil people and become overconfident, leaving Harry to just finish him off.

EvilElitest

2008-09-02, 03:24 PM

If any main character in ANY given media could defeat its main villain without resorting to Deus ex Machina or any external influences, we could kiss literature good-bye.

I mean, the whole point of the villain is "He's bad, he's doing evil stuff, and he's better than me." Or in any way more powerful. The hero MUST do a lot of things to overpower him.

Picture it: What it would go like if Harry could easily overpower him:

Dumbledore: "Harry, Voldemort is trying to take over the..."
Harry: "Voldemort? HA! He's just a big pushover. Be right back, ima go kill him now. Back by lunch, 'k?"
Harry kills Voldemort no problem, awesome epic saga is now dead.

In ineffective villain is not a scary villain. Voldemort is not at all threatening. Twrin Lanniminster is, because he is brutally effective

Also, i like that your killing Narato, you have my support
from
EE
edit
in that last fight, imagine the damage voldemort could have gun if he brought along a gernade laucher and a machine gun. I mean some wizards would just shield against it, but not all of them

thegurullamen

2008-09-02, 03:43 PM

in that last fight, imagine the damage voldemort could have gun if he brought along a gernade laucher and a machine gun. I mean some wizards would just shield against it, but not all of them

That sounds a little too far-fetched to me. Aside from Muggle issues, Voldey would never resort to something as bland as a machine gun, even if it fired grenade rounds. A nuke would have been great except for the collateral damage; he would have wanted the buildings intact afterward. (Still, the idea of Voldey levitating a nuclear warhead behind him while making his long-winded speeches--hilarious.)

No, I think the best route would have been the least ethical one. "In a controversial turn, the final book of the Harry Potter series now features a 'darker and edgier' Lord Voldemort with the ability to emanate a magical form of anthrax that causes enemies to explode into a pool of zombie blood." There. Practical while still magical and awesome.

Setra

2008-09-02, 03:44 PM

1. Bring several small lead balls
2. Use spell to send them at high velocity towards enemy
3. ????
4. PROFIT

hamishspence

2008-09-02, 03:46 PM

Given how much damage Harry did with one Sectumsempra spell, one wonders why Voldemort did not simply try that. Its always the lethal spell, not immobilization, or just "accio big heavy rock"

Beholder1995

2008-09-02, 04:02 PM

Wizards seem relatively vulnerable to melee combat...

What if Harry just somehow managed to hit Voldy with a shovel? :smalltongue:

The only problem with that plan is avoiding death before you can actually bean him...

Rare Pink Leech

2008-09-02, 04:06 PM

Merits such as, off the top of my head: courage against unreasonable odds, self-sacrifice, regard for those below you in status, loyalty, mercy, friendship, trust...

Yeah, Harry Potter has that.

You're right, Harry Potter does have all those merits in spades. They all contributed to his perseverance throughout the books. However, time after time it was someone or something else that magically (no pun intended) allowed him to win, not a particular ability of his own.

DomaDoma

2008-09-02, 04:10 PM

Given how much damage Harry did with one Sectumsempra spell, one wonders why Voldemort did not simply try that. Its always the lethal spell, not immobilization, or just "accio big heavy rock"

I reckon Snape kept that one pretty close to the vest, or Bellatrix, at the very least, would just go to town with it. And the rest are comparatively easy to deflect.

As for the guns-'n'-grenades thing dominating the thread - Muggles-are-scum and/or nonlethal-warfare outlook aside, it really doesn't gel with the fantasy atmosphere. Cope.

On a tangential note, "simply" is now the official GiantITP term for discussing plot holes. Update your lexicons!

Oslecamo

2008-09-02, 04:55 PM

You're right, Harry Potter does have all those merits in spades. They all contributed to his perseverance throughout the books. However, time after time it was someone or something else that magically (no pun intended) allowed him to win, not a particular ability of his own.

That's Harry Potter's main power-He has got 18 charisma and took leadership!

So while he himself is incompetent, he manages to atract a big bunch of followers and cohorts with great abilities and make them work togheter.

This is, he raised an army almost by himself. Twice!!

He's not a warrior. He's a general! Hermione and Ron are his personal bodyguards/advisors, and then he has a whole network of servants alliesspread trough England that allows him to solve any problem by calling the right person.

Fri

2008-09-02, 06:39 PM

Okay, now why dumbledore didn't just blast voldemort with his awesome magic power ON THE FIRST WAR WITH VOLDEMORT?

You know, before the series started. Can someone refresh my memory if this ever alluded in the series?

It's been so long since I read the books, more so the first few books.

I remember the veteran said that the Order of the stick, I mean Phoenix, was overwhelmed by the Dark Eaters. But if dumbledore just kill voldemort, or dunno, seal him or something, the dark eaters would scatter.

Maybe voldie can't be killed. But dumbledore didn't know yet about horcruxes. And I believe horcruxes or no horcruxes, blasting a couple of hole into voldemort would be cathartic for the good guys, bad morale for the bad guys, and not healthy for voldemort.

Or maybe that means... voldemort actually hide from dumbledore on the first war? Huh, what a pushover. He just bully people that are weaker than him, but hide from people that's actually stronger than him.

and...

That's Harry Potter's main power-He has got 18 charisma and took leadership!

So while he himself is incompetent, he manages to atract a big bunch of followers and cohorts with great abilities and make them work togheter.

This is, he raised an army almost by himself. Twice!!

He's not a warrior. He's a general! Hermione and Ron are his personal bodyguards/advisors, and then he has a whole network of servants alliesspread trough England that allows him to solve any problem by calling the right person.

That actually make perfect sense. Harry's power is Love, aka Charisma. Attracting a bunch of competent cohort IS his power.

Mr. Scaly

2008-09-02, 06:46 PM

As to the guns and missiles approach, didn't Hermione once say that muggle machinery doesn't work in Hogwart's or did I dream that up? It would make for a nice excuse anyway...

As for always using Abra Kadabra I guess Voldemort always wanted to make sure that Herry was dead. Getting hit by Sectosemprum or giant fire snakes is painful, but doesn't always get the job done. Getting AKed means you're perma dead.

MammonAzrael

2008-09-02, 07:12 PM

As to the guns and missiles approach, didn't Hermione once say that muggle machinery doesn't work in Hogwart's or did I dream that up? It would make for a nice excuse anyway...

Yes...but then how does Harry's wristwatch keep working? he had it since before the series started, so it's purely muggle tech, but it's mentioned that it stops working after the mermaid challenge in the fourth book because it wasn't waterproof.

If the watch was purely mechanical, that could still leave the opening for electronics to go haywire around Hogwarts, but not mechanical items (like older guns). If the watch was in any way electronic (which is likely), then there's a big gaping plothole as to why Voldemort didn't just get a suicide bomber to take out Hogwarts and surrounding ground with explosives (we already know chemistry works just fine).

and on the matter of beating Voldemort, why didn't they just use the Time Turner? If time travel is acceptable enough to be given to a child, then there certainly would be someone willing to use it to kill Voldemort.

So, frankly, I don't think you should try to pick apart the books, because they won't hold up. Just enjoy them for what they are: an overall decent read, and a great gateway for kids to get kids to read in our increasingly television-dominated world.

Areswargod139

2008-09-02, 07:26 PM

Yes...but then how does Harry's wristwatch keep working? he had it since before the series started, so it's purely muggle tech, but it's mentioned that it stops working after the mermaid challenge in the fourth book because it wasn't waterproof.

If the watch was purely mechanical, that could still leave the opening for electronics to go haywire around Hogwarts, but not mechanical items (like older guns). If the watch was in any way electronic (which is likely), then there's a big gaping plothole as to why Voldemort didn't just get a suicide bomber to take out Hogwarts and surrounding ground with explosives (we already know chemistry works just fine).

and on the matter of beating Voldemort, why didn't they just use the Time Turner? If time travel is acceptable enough to be given to a child, then there certainly would be someone willing to use it to kill Voldemort.

So, frankly, I don't think you should try to pick apart the books, because they won't hold up. Just enjoy them for what they are: an overall decent read, and a great gateway for kids to get kids to read in our increasingly television-dominated world.

I thinke ye be right, good sir.

And on that, one thing I couldn't get about Harry Potterverse was the very unskilled and undynamic way magic was utilized by even the most expert of weilders. No one in that 'verse ever came off to me as a real fighter or scholar, they all just seemed so...silver age. Bleck.:smallyuk:

Rare Pink Leech

2008-09-02, 07:27 PM

That's Harry Potter's main power-He has got 18 charisma and took leadership!

So while he himself is incompetent, he manages to atract a big bunch of followers and cohorts with great abilities and make them work togheter.

This is, he raised an army almost by himself. Twice!!

He's not a warrior. He's a general! Hermione and Ron are his personal bodyguards/advisors, and then he has a whole network of servants alliesspread trough England that allows him to solve any problem by calling the right person.

I love this explanation! Now that I see everything in a different light, it all makes much more sense. And is more satisfying. I doubt Rowling intended it to be this way, but I like it.

Mr. Scaly

2008-09-02, 07:47 PM

Yes...but then how does Harry's wristwatch keep working? he had it since before the series started, so it's purely muggle tech, but it's mentioned that it stops working after the mermaid challenge in the fourth book because it wasn't waterproof.

If the watch was purely mechanical, that could still leave the opening for electronics to go haywire around Hogwarts, but not mechanical items (like older guns). If the watch was in any way electronic (which is likely), then there's a big gaping plothole as to why Voldemort didn't just get a suicide bomber to take out Hogwarts and surrounding ground with explosives (we already know chemistry works just fine).

and on the matter of beating Voldemort, why didn't they just use the Time Turner? If time travel is acceptable enough to be given to a child, then there certainly would be someone willing to use it to kill Voldemort.

So, frankly, I don't think you should try to pick apart the books, because they won't hold up. Just enjoy them for what they are: an overall decent read, and a great gateway for kids to get kids to read in our increasingly television-dominated world.

I'm not trying to pick anything apart. Hermione herself says in Goblet of Fire that the high levels of magic make technology go haywire.

EvilElitest

2008-09-02, 07:49 PM

That sounds a little too far-fetched to me. Aside from Muggle issues, Voldey would never resort to something as bland as a machine gun, even if it fired grenade rounds. A nuke would have been great except for the collateral damage; he would have wanted the buildings intact afterward. (Still, the idea of Voldey levitating a nuclear warhead behind him while making his long-winded speeches--hilarious.)

No, I think the best route would have been the least ethical one. "In a controversial turn, the final book of the Harry Potter series now features a 'darker and edgier' Lord Voldemort with the ability to emanate a magical form of anthrax that causes enemies to explode into a pool of zombie blood." There. Practical while still magical and awesome.

1) Well that is why Voldy is a moron
2) Fair enough
from
EE

MammonAzrael

2008-09-03, 01:09 AM

I'm not trying to pick anything apart. Hermione herself says in Goblet of Fire that the high levels of magic make technology go haywire.

*nod* I know Hermione said something to that effect (though I hadn't recalled that it was in Goblet of Fire). I'd quote the book, but since I read my sister's copies I don't actually have any on hand. :smalltongue: It should be somewhere after the mermaid trial, but unfortunately I don't remember where, since I think it was just a small comment. It's implied that it was working fine (for four years in Hogwarts) before it failed from being immersed.

However, it's been quite a while since I read the books, so my memory could be faulty. :smallsigh: Should I have to opportunity in the next couple days, I'll be sure to look for the quote.

(And I still say a large amount of C4 should do the trick quite well. :smallbiggrin:)

On another argument, Voldy could've laid low since he was resurrected, and since the only ones to believe him back were Dumbly and Harry, he could've operated in secret. Instead of causing terror, he could've had his minions Imperious and impersonate huge amounts of students, and just ambushed the teachers. It obviously would've taken a lot of planning, but he had the time.

But then, I'm not sure if that would be his style or not...

Fri

2008-09-03, 03:38 AM

He actually did that. Imperiousing key government official and put spies to important places... For a year at least, from the ending of the fourth book until the big fight in the fifth book.

Ditto

2008-09-03, 06:43 AM

Dumbledore never fought Voldemort because Voldemort doesn't like to pick fights (for the most part, Potters excluded). He is mentioned killing good guys rather infrequently - as with Amelia Bones or Moody, exceptionally gifted wizards. Recall the quote I'm about to butcher/paraphrase - "Kill a thousand men, or a hundred thousand, and you are a butcher the world will band together against. But kill just one man in the dark of night, and they will fear you mightily. Kill a dozen and they will stay indoors for fear of you lurking in every shadow." Much more his style.

There's nothing wrong with using a rifle, except that wizards are by and large completely unfamiliar with the concept. Remember book 3 - "The muggle prime minister has been alerted and informed muggle media, who disclosed that Sirius Black was carrying a gun (a sort of metal wand/rod muggles use to kill one another)."

Harry didn't raise an army, he got 30 kids. Granted, that's not bad in a school of about 300 (75 of whom are Slytherin), but it's still just 30 kids.

Time Turners is a great question, and already been quit debated. Theory is that anyone who was capable of bringing the fight to Voldemort AND had access to a TIme Turner was leery enough of the unintended consequences of time travel to opt against. But you'd think it'd be that easy, right? Think how it would have played out...

Voldemort: And tonight, my Death Eaters, I will descened upon the Potters and become invincible. I will-
::pop-pop-pop-pop-pop::
::stun-stun-stunstunstun::
Moody: Alright Auror Team, mop 'em up. It's a good thing we were able to jump back in time three hours, apparate over here, and pounce on these guys before they could have... I mean already did... I mean... dammit time travel verbs! ...kill those Potter folks. Who wants to go out for butterbeer?

Oslecamo

2008-09-03, 03:36 PM

Harry didn't raise an army, he got 30 kids. Granted, that's not bad in a school of about 300 (75 of whom are Slytherin), but it's still just 30 kids.

That was for starters, and you still have to take in acount several veteran wizards, two infiltrated house elfs and one and an half giants(Hagrid and his half brother). Now that could acount to a company or something.

In the 7th book, he puts around 90% of the students, their families and all the house elfs togheter in a massize zerg attack against the death eaters.

Voldemort: And tonight, my Death Eaters, I will descened upon the Potters and become invincible. I will-
::pop-pop-pop-pop-pop::
::stun-stun-stunstunstun::
Moody: Alright Auror Team, mop 'em up. It's a good thing we were able to jump back in time three hours, apparate over here, and pounce on these guys before they could have... I mean already did... I mean... dammit time travel verbs! ...kill those Potter folks. Who wants to go out for butterbeer?

This would demand that they knew where Voldemort was before killing the Potters. Voldy was always very secretive, and he proved to be able to easily kill several wizards by himself, plus being a stealth master. And they can't risk the time turners falling on enemy hands.

So, when Harry's plot shield kicked in, the ministry decided two wizards wasn't much of a price to pay, and heck, orphans always make better heroes.

What? I never said the magic ministry was good. Stupid selfish bastards that keep all their magic for themselves...

Mr. Scaly

2008-09-03, 03:47 PM

Ah, I know why VOldemort doesn't just shoot Harry. Guns are a muggle device! And muggles are by definition inferior and sucky.

hamishspence

2008-09-03, 03:50 PM

Given Voldy spent first 10 years of his life raised as a Muggle, you'd think he'd realize their stuff isn't all sucky.

That said, those 10 years were mostly in 30's- tech was less then.

Starbuck_II

2008-09-03, 03:58 PM

Given Voldy spent first 10 years of his life raised as a Muggle, you'd think he'd realize their stuff isn't all sucky.

That said, those 10 years were mostly in 30's- tech was less then.

True, but he hated anything that reminded him he was muggle: a Mud-Blood!
That was why he had an inferiority complex. He was dirty blooded.

Hopeless

2008-09-03, 04:22 PM

Still, almost dead and incorporeal Voldemort is a lot better than a fully powerful Voldermort. It would have at least given Dumbledore more time to get rid of the Horcruxes. And Voldemort wouldn't have been free wreak havoc.

He did unfortunately he seriously underestimated the strength of one in particular resulting in well read the books and see for yourself (I don't know how to set up a spoiler zone ok?)

hamishspence

2008-09-03, 04:25 PM

We know that even a lone Horcrux can wreak a surprising amount of havoc independant of Voldemort. It may be unusual even for a Horcrux: I hypothesised that the diary, rather than the ring, made more sense as Voldemorts's first Horcrux, with half his soul, and all the others contain progressively less soul.

Hopeless

2008-09-03, 04:27 PM

That... er... might work, but I doubt Voldemort would respond to being publically challenged to a duel. He just doesn't come off as the type who cares about that sort of thing.

Have you heard of an anime series entitled "Those who hunt elves"?

I recommend it, Voldemort would not have survived death by tank possessed by cat spirit!

All you need is a really large fish sorry shark have it conjured above Voldemort and get out of the way!

By the time Voldemort realises whats been done he'll be too busy trying to avoid a tank gone berserk!

warty goblin

2008-09-03, 04:29 PM

That was for starters, and you still have to take in acount several veteran wizards, two infiltrated house elfs and one and an half giants(Hagrid and his half brother). Now that could acount to a company or something.

In the 7th book, he puts around 90% of the students, their families and all the house elfs togheter in a massize zerg attack against the death eaters.

This would demand that they knew where Voldemort was before killing the Potters. Voldy was always very secretive, and he proved to be able to easily kill several wizards by himself, plus being a stealth master. And they can't risk the time turners falling on enemy hands.

So, when Harry's plot shield kicked in, the ministry decided two wizards wasn't much of a price to pay, and heck, orphans always make better heroes.

What? I never said the magic ministry was good. Stupid selfish bastards that keep all their magic for themselves...

The problem is once you can go back in time, you literally have infinite time (and also energy) to get something right after the fact, up until roughly the point where you create enough copies of yourself in the past to cause the earth to collapse into a neutron star. Come to think of it, that would probably solve the Voldemort problem as well, as well as balance the budget and save social security. Now granted there's that whole "don't let yourself see yourself" bit, but that's only a problem if you don't expect to see yourself. Once you are OK with the idea of sixty or eighty of yourself running around at once however there's no more problem, and after the fact you can just explain it to everybody as some sort of sting operation involving lots of polyjuice potion.

So to scrag Voldemort the morning after his adventure in trying to kill Harry "not a plot devise" Potter, one simply assembles a lot of reasonably talented wizards and sends them back to a rallying point in time, call this t1. They wait until t2, right before the event in question, then go back to t1. They wait until t2 again, and now there are two groups of the same people there, who all go back to t1 and wait until t2, resulting in four groups of the same people. Continue this until you have a lot of people, then go blow Voldemort into a lot of very small pieces, before returning to the present at t3. Bada-bing, infinite army of the past.

black dragoon

2008-09-03, 04:30 PM

Yeah but the ring was the basically part of the crown jewels of hogwarts and belonged to
the founder of slytherin
and since ol' voldy styled himself the one true heir why not make his most precious and mystical treasure into one. That and the fact V is vain. VERY VERY VERY VAIN. It fits his personality all to well.

hamishspence

2008-09-03, 04:37 PM

The question I was wondering was- was the ring the first Horcrux or not? and when he asked Slughorn about them, was this after he'd made his first one and was wondering what hapens if he makes more than one, as is suggested in Half-Blood Prince?

Edit: Not ring of slytherin but Peverell ring- and, completely unknown to him, it was the Ressurection Stone. Locket was owned by Slytherin.

black dragoon

2008-09-03, 04:40 PM

:smallredface: sorry it's been awhile since i've read...I think it may have very well have been the ring though.

Oslecamo

2008-09-03, 04:41 PM

So to scrag Voldemort the morning after his adventure in trying to kill Harry "not a plot devise" Potter, one simply assembles a lot of reasonably talented wizards and sends them back to a rallying point in time, call this t1. They wait until t2, right before the event in question, then go back to t1. They wait until t2 again, and now there are two groups of the same people there, who all go back to t1 and wait until t2, resulting in four groups of the same people. Continue this until you have a lot of people, then go blow Voldemort into a lot of very small pieces, before returning to the present at t3. Bada-bing, infinite army of the past.

There's a little problem on this logic. You still keep aging. And you still grow hungry and sleepy

The time turners only work in one direction. You can go to the past, but not to the future as far as we know.

So, you may risk ending up with nothing but a bunch of dying insane old mens if you're not carefull.

Not to mention such other details as oxygen consuption and mental stress. Hermione herself couldn't take the effort.

hamishspence

2008-09-03, 04:44 PM

yes, was a bit blurry. We know diary must have been completed before he left Hogwarts: perhaps even before Voldemorts last year, given that soul manifests as a sixteen year old Prefect.

I wasn't sure whether the "50 years ago" date meant Exactly 50 years ago, but either way it implies death of Myrtle and deaths of Riddles might have occurred in same year. Not sure if death by Basilisk counts for horcrux-making purposes.

warty goblin

2008-09-03, 04:57 PM

There's a little problem on this logic. You still keep aging. And you still grow hungry and sleepy

The time turners only work in one direction. You can go to the past, but not to the future as far as we know.

So, you may risk ending up with nothing but a bunch of dying insane old mens if you're not carefull.

Not to mention such other details as oxygen consuption and mental stress. Hermione herself couldn't take the effort.

All of which are simple to solve. There's no evidence to suggest that people age faster in the past, or at an increased rate if there are more copies of them hanging around. Since this is the case, one would have to make a truly insane number of loops in the past in order to actually age significantly* In fact as far as I can remember from book 3, the two copies of Harry and Hermione running around are independant actors, and so each would presumably need to eat, sleep according to their own schedule. So after you reach 1/2 the desired number of people in your time loop, just go a day or so back, get some sleep, eat something, etc. then come back, rendevous with the other newly formed half of your contingent, then get to Dark Lord killing. After the opp is complete, simply apperate back to the launch site, and everything is good. The best part is that if there's a screw-up, as long as one copy gets out alive, they can alert the present, who can then send back another group of people to fix the mistake.

Also the stress was only a problem for Hermione after nine months of continious usage, not a single operation.

* And I mean insane. Assuming you put your t1 and t2 ten minutes apart and start with four wizards, after two hours of continious looping you would have 4^12, or 16,777,216 wizards. Two or three runs should be more than sufficient.

Oslecamo

2008-09-03, 05:11 PM

More logic.

Congratulations. That's why it's called fantasy. Every fantasy seting has plot holes of "if they can do X, why didn't they do Y?". Asking the writer to try to create an entire working universe is somewhat hard when we can't even explain the real universe 100%.

Maybe magic just makes people really dumb, wich would explain a lot of things.

warty goblin

2008-09-03, 05:31 PM

Congratulations. That's why it's called fantasy. Every fantasy seting has plot holes of "if they can do X, why didn't they do Y?". Asking the writer to try to create an entire working universe is somewhat hard when we can't even explain the real universe 100%.

Maybe magic just makes people really dumb, wich would explain a lot of things.

There are plot holes and then there are plot holes. Being able to go back in time and do anything you want is kind of a motherload of plot hole however, the sort of logical gap that makes old plot hole miners knuckle their foreheads and go "Yep, that's paydirt." I mean it's the sort of thing that about fifteen minutes thought reveals makes literally every story development completely and utterly meaningless, because it only stands by fiat, and is no longer in any way organic to the story itself.

It's this sort of thing that really gets me too. I'm not so fussed if a complete knowledge of canon and a bit of extrapolation reveals some flaw in the design, but people really should think before letting people do things in stories. Not just "is giving this person this power going to advance the story the way I want" but "what sorts of other things can be done with this power?" Doing so makes one's creations much much more respectable. Don't get me wrong, I like Harry Potter just fine, I just don't respect it as a story or a built world particularly much.

As for the retardant effect of magic upon intellect, it would explain oh so much.

Ditto

2008-09-03, 06:23 PM

It's rather uncommon in time travel fic to see people duping themselves umpteen times, is it not? Anyway, Hermione cited past examples of wizards who played with time too much getting all wonky, so somebody probably tried making 12 of himself to help out with the chores and wackiness ensued.
Instead of 1 hour before, they could arrive 5 minutes before the Potters were killed and sit outside right then. Same diff.

Harry did NOT get two house elves, a giant-and-a-half, and several veteran wizards. They were part of the Order, which has nothing to do with Harry (despite it often spending time guarding him as a way of keeping tabs on Voldemort).

In the final battle, Harry doesn't get full credit for gathering the army. Really, the credit mainly belongs to Neville. He gathered the DA Redux over the course of the year at Hogwarts during the Never-Ending Camping Trip, and summong the DA Mk. I back with the galleons Hermione made in book 5. Word spread from there - Harry didn't actually call on much of anyone.

He does have an argument for rallying *some* of the random student populace, but that's talking about only of-age non-Slytherin students, a possible pool of about 60 people (6th & 7th years, 10 per house, three houses) - and not all of them stuck around the fight. So at best, during the final battle he was the standard around which 50 already-besieged students could rally around. The sequenece of events went, "V: I want Harry! Slytherin gal: Give him Harry! Everyone else: No!" Harry didn't actually summon them.

Oslecamo

2008-09-04, 10:25 AM

Harry did NOT get two house elves, a giant-and-a-half, and several veteran wizards. They were part of the Order, which has nothing to do with Harry (despite it often spending time guarding him as a way of keeping tabs on Voldemort).

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that what saved Harry from the herd of berseking herd of centaurs was Hagrid's brother, who was "tamed" by Hermione, who responds to Harry. Chain of comand.

In the Harry Potter world, giants are a force to be reckoned with. It alone should count for one or two dozen average wizards. And he wasn't part of the order.

Also, Dobby the house elf pledged his loyalty to Harry. He didn't belong to the Order. And is pretty handy having someone who can teleport in and out of any place at any time. He also got the other house elf. Not part of the Order.

Sirius himself would be willing to do anything for Harry.

Rita Skeeter, altough somewhat unwillingly, ended up also becoming another of Harry's soldiers, serving as both spy and publicity manager. Information manipulation wins wars. Not part of the order.

In the final battle, Harry doesn't get full credit for gathering the army. Really, the credit mainly belongs to Neville. He gathered the DA Redux over the course of the year at Hogwarts during the Never-Ending Camping Trip, and summong the DA Mk. I back with the galleons Hermione made in book 5. Word spread from there - Harry didn't actually call on much of anyone.

Yes, and what did Neville achieve while Harry was out? Nothing but hiding.

The school was in an enviroment of fear. Nobody dared to opose the Death Eaters, even the teachers bowed to Voldemort.

But when Harry apears again, half the school becomes willing to fight to the death, just because Harry said he needed some time to find some artifact. That's leadership. He apears out of nowhere and his loyal followers are ready to lay down their lifes to fulfill his wishes.

It was Harry who discovered the room, Harry who inspired Neville and all the other students that they could resist by themselves.

Neville did his job as another of Harry's trusted lieutenants. You can't run an army by yourself after all. Again, chain of comand.

black dragoon

2008-09-04, 10:38 AM

Oslecamo

2008-09-04, 10:43 AM

Really in this situation Harry is the rather awkward general isn't he? He has little experience as a leader and has little in the way of a tactical mindset in the first few books. Even the DA was really ran mostly by his trusty lieutenants who were competent at the job than he was.I think it's safe to say they rallied to the boy who lived but I don't think he would have stood a chance without them providing serious back-up and cover.

The guy on top of the chain of comand rarely is the smartest or the strongest or the best tactician.

The guy on top of the chain of comand is the best at making people working togheter and manipulating them. And you gotta admit Harry's really good at both. Well, better than the rest of the wizardry world at least.

If not for him, Hermione would just be the school's bookworm and Ron the black sheep of the Weasley family.

black dragoon

2008-09-04, 10:53 AM

True, Though in one of the more angsty books they fell into those rather quickly. That being said Dumbledore actually i think was one of the more competent leaders in lit. or at least the one with a ridiculously thought out plan and back-up plans and back-up back-up plans....yeah the guy knew how to plan and to deceive every wizard witch and muggle he knew, I think he threw V for a loop once didn't he?

Ditto

2008-09-04, 02:53 PM

Grawp likes Hermione. That's not fealty to Harry by any stretch. Sirius loves Harry, but was *certainly* not under his command. He freed Dobby (who has a naturaly impulse to be subservient and owned, even as crazy as he is) and owns Kreacher. Skeeter was blackmailed by Hermione. None of these people qualify as recruits.

Dobby found the Room of Requirement, as did dozens of students in the past 1000 years. (Why did Voldemort think Only He Found the room of requirement, when centuries of junk had already been stored there?!)

Harry gets fully half the credit for leading DA, absolutely; that was an enterprise which could not have continued without Harry's presence, even though it was Hermione's brainchild and project. Neville's crew, however, existed without any contact with Harry and on its own initiative. Everyone thought Harry was dead! Harry inspired Neville and they grew as friends and formed each others' childhoods, but Harry did not hand Neville the command stick. Chain of command implies you actually gave someone an order, and Harry most decidedly did *not* at any point in book 7.

Neville did, however, run thing and raise hell at Hogwarts. He/Ginny/Luna *almost* got away with stealing an artifact from the third most able wizard in the world. They did everything they could to remind the students what free wizarding was all about, sowing chaos and undermining the Carrows' rule. The teachers played it cool because they had to stay in place in order to protect the students, not because they were afraid of Voldemort. Most of them were actually in the Order...

People decided to join the final stand against Voldemort when they were already besieged in the castle, and faced with the 'now or never' prospect. They had hope because Harry was on a final mission (not that they really knew what was going on with that), but having a rallying point does not make that symbol a leader. He served that function with the original DA, but not at the second Battle of Hogwarts.

If anyone gets credit for leading the forces of good, it would be Hermione. She repeatedly uses Harry as her puppet (to put it somewhat disingenuously), and SINGLE-HANDEDLY saves the day at every turn in book 7, to say nothing of her leadership in the series as a whole.

Fri

2008-09-04, 03:10 PM

Oslecamo

2008-09-04, 03:11 PM

Neville: Finally, I'm in control of my own destiny!

Harry: Hey, Neville, if you happen to see the giant snake that already killed god knows how many wizards, please go ahead and try your best to kill it will ya?

Neville:Sir yes sir! Imediatily sir!

By the 7th book, Harry had such influence that people followed his comands whitout questioning, no matter how suicide and idiotic they may sound.

Now that Hermione is the power behind the throne, that's an interesting and valid theory. All she's lacking to be the main character is the fact her past is completely dull, so using Harry as her face puppet is beliveable.

On the other hand, great leaders get other people to do their dirty work, and Hermione surely does a lot of her dirty work herself.

EDIT:Yeah, but what Fri says. Harry is a beacon for people to gather, and being a beacon is being a kind of leader. If not for Harry, Hermione would never get acquainted with Hagrid, and never would get Gawp as her pet.

Fri

2008-09-04, 03:13 PM

This thread make me understand more than 5 years browsing the internet... It all make sense.

Harry's true power is army building. Hermione manipulate everything... (well, she IS the author's avatar...)

Oslecamo

2008-09-04, 03:16 PM

Agreed. It all makes much more sense now.

Harry is the pretty face, the president/king/emperor who atracts strong and smart people towards him, and Hermione is the trusted advisor/servant/sage who sits by the sidelines and is the one actually pulling the strings.

SmartAlec

2008-09-04, 03:22 PM

Funny that Hermione is the author's 'avatar', as she always struck me as a very chilly character, all the way through; but my perception of her didn't crystallise until Book 7, where she modifies her parents' memories and has them sent to another country and just shrugs it off (man, that's cold), and escapes from the Lovegood home by using her surroundings in a way that might well have impressed Jason Bourne.

What puzzled me a little about the series was Ron's slow decline in capability. At age 11, he's a chess prodigy. By age 14, he's a bumbling loon. I get the feeling that by rights, Ron should have been a more competent and useful member of the teenage triad.

Oslecamo

2008-09-04, 03:26 PM

What puzzled me a little about the series was Ron's slow decline in capability. At age 11, he's a chess prodigy. By age 14, he's a bumbling loon. I get the feeling that by rights, Ron should have been a more competent and useful member of the teenage triad.

He's the brute meatshield/guinea pig. When someone has to get punched/cursed here we have Ron Weasley to be sacrificed.

He's also usefull when the triad needs some ex machina. He do knows a lot of trivial stuff that comes in handy due to growing up in the wizardry world.

black dragoon

2008-09-04, 03:28 PM

Agreed. Ron was very promising. If anything He should at least been capable of out thinking some of the deatheaters....

Ditto

2008-09-05, 11:44 AM

Sad face for Ron all around. All he did in book 6 was snog for the middle third... well, that's true for mostly anyone, but occassionally they'd advance the plot a little. Ron was useless in book 7.

Hermione is *scary* in book 7. She does what has to be done, that's some real kind of bravery there.

Neville did everything in book 7 on his own (or rather, independent of Harry). In the middle of the climactic battle, he tells Neville a piece of vital intel, and passed it on because he thought he was going to die. I don't see that as Neville folding to puppy-dog at Harry...

Dumbledore and Voldemort, *they* are leaders. They are generals. Harry is individually, dopishly brave, and unconscionably lucky. He doesn't get credit as a leader just for having survived like he did.

Oslecamo

2008-09-05, 01:21 PM

Dumbledore and Voldemort, *they* are leaders. They are generals. Harry is individually, dopishly brave, and unconscionably lucky. He doesn't get credit as a leader just for having survived like he did.

For someone who isn't a leader, he surely gets a lot of people willing to serve as cannon fodder for him.

What was the last time someone in the wizardry world managed to make the docile house elfs take up arms? They can teleport anywhere and everywhere, one would expect house elfs to be the ultimate assassins/comandos on the magic world, but Harry seems to be the only person who manages to make them do anything else but house siting.

black dragoon

2008-09-05, 03:47 PM

Mostly because of the rampant racism involved in the wizarding culture towards anything not truely human.

Ditto

2008-09-05, 04:22 PM

Big true with the racism, yeah. Also, who assassinates wizards anyway? I doesn't seem like wizarding has murderers like we do - anyone who kills another wizard is of the completely deranged psychopath mold, not so much with the sadly-more-common attacks we see in our world today. Azkaban is decidedly not the place with three square meals and cable TV. :smallamused:

I will grant that Dobby and Kreacher (eventually) qualify as Harry's personal strike force and rallied the house elves. On the other hand, they were defending Hogwarts from the 'splodey sort of invasion. I do not understand why they used barbecue forks and collanders to attack instead of, y'know, MAGIC. In book 2 Dobby bowls Lucius over for brandishing a wand at Harry. The collective house elf host totally should have pants'd the Death Eaters in the entrance hall.

Sholos

2008-09-05, 04:42 PM

Well, Dobby's a little ... off. Not to mention he was a free house elf at that point, unlike the others. They may not have felt as inclined to use magic against other wizards.

black dragoon

2008-09-05, 04:42 PM

Could be the whole don't harm the master kicked in. That and think many of them are really afraid to attack a human in a way that can permanently do any harm.

Ditto

2008-09-05, 08:34 PM

Dobby was pretty oblivious when it came to evaluating what could cause harm... "I love Harry Potter and want to keep him safe... let's attack him with a zooming metal slug! Go bludger go!" :smallsmile:

There's no doubt house elves could end lives with a thought, nor that they're wholely disinclined to, but there are tons of ways in between that you can use magic to effectively immobilize if not outright incapacitate bad guys. Kreacher dragged 'Dung back against his will, and as mentioned before Dobby laid out Lucius with a flick of the wrist.

black dragoon

2008-09-05, 08:39 PM

Which makes one wonder how the heck we they 'tamed' houseelves in the first place I'd be terrified of fighting them magic or no.

Jayngfet

2008-09-05, 08:51 PM

I find that looking for logic in potterverse isn't wise. Anything and everything breaks down with little examination(like why arthur weasly didn't make some sort of magic gun when things got serious).

Ditto

2008-09-05, 08:56 PM

A gun? You mean a black metal rod Muggles use to kill one another?

Why would a wizard ever need a gun? :smallconfused:

Jayngfet

2008-09-05, 09:12 PM

A gun? You mean a black metal rod Muggles use to kill one another?

Why would a wizard ever need a gun? :smallconfused:

Because Word of god says that a normal gun can kill a wizard no problem, needs no memorization or pronounciation, can be massed produced, and the ministry can't track you with it. And it's faster, you don't need to say any long words or make precise motions.

And this is just something like a glock.

Ditto

2008-09-05, 09:15 PM

Ah, I figured when you meant magic gun you meant a magic gun. Not an actual gun, made by magic.

You still need a wizard who can shoot, and given the choice between a wand and a gun I'm keeping the wand! If you don't hit that first shot, you're pretty much screwed. Sniping is the only way to go if you want to shoot a wizard... but Voldemort doesn't exactly sit around in the open.

black dragoon

2008-09-05, 09:15 PM

agreed.Rather odd how that happens.:smalltongue:

Jayngfet

2008-09-05, 09:24 PM

black dragoon

2008-09-05, 09:53 PM

yeah...strange that logic thing...

Oslecamo

2008-09-06, 12:20 PM

There's still the fact that all spells move slower than bullets and don't have anything to help aim.

Only if you're a second rate wizard.

Both Voldy and Dumbleodore more than once in the books defeat several oponents with just one or two spells.

Also remembers that peter Petigrew killed around 50 people with a single curse, whitout harming himself in the process, at close range and Sirius got the blame. Now that's something you'll have an hard time pulling off with personal guns.

So I guess that a pissed off wizard with a wand isn't someone you want to bother.

black dragoon

2008-09-06, 12:27 PM

I imagine any wizard with a wand is not something to bother. If pettigrew could kill fifty people with one curse I can't even begin to imagine the full power of wizs like D and V.:smalleek:

Oslecamo

2008-09-06, 12:49 PM

You're right to fear them.

Wizards can teleport at will, become imune to normal fire(as the school books said the medieval witch burnings were useless because wizards easily escaped them with fire protection charms) and god knows what else.

Plus they have excellent stealth capacities, not to mention stuff like silent mind control and repulsion charms.

No wonder they don't want us muggles to find about them.

GoC

2008-09-06, 12:58 PM

As to the guns and missiles approach, didn't Hermione once say that muggle machinery doesn't work in Hogwart's or did I dream that up? It would make for a nice excuse anyway...

Does anyone know what exactly "muggle machinery" is?
I'd love to know how they disable electricity without disabling the EM force causing themselves to fall apart.

EDIT: I think Harry only attracts people under his leadership due to writer fiat and not due to any particular qualities on his part. He's not exactly insirational, is he?

Green Bean

2008-09-06, 01:28 PM

EDIT: I think Harry only attracts people under his leadership due to writer fiat and not due to any particular qualities on his part. He's not exactly insirational, is he?

He isn't that much of a charismatic leader in and of himself, but he makes up for it by being a walking, talking symbol of "the bad guys don't always win".

warty goblin

2008-09-06, 02:29 PM

Beholder1995

2008-09-06, 02:34 PM

Dallas-Dakota

2008-09-06, 02:34 PM

They didn't use guns, because its a taboo in the HP magic world.

If HP would pull a gun out of his belt, shoot and kill Voldemort everybody would shun him. Except for a few muggleborns.

Lamech

2008-09-06, 03:37 PM

They didn't use guns, because its a taboo in the HP magic world.

If HP would pull a gun out of his belt, shoot and kill Voldemort everybody would shun him. Except for a few muggleborns.
I thought wizards needed what a gun was explained to them, (and even the person who wrote explaintion didn't seem to know what he was talking about). They probably would wonder were Harry got that cool weapon, and what magic was used to make it.

warty goblin

2008-09-06, 03:48 PM

Probably only about as much damage, actually. A grenade launcher probably isn't the best antipersonal weapon around.

Now, gatling guns, on the other hand... :smalltongue:

hmm, good point. What one really needs to fear is the wizard who begins to combine technology and magic. I'm thinking magically lightened body armor (hey, why not wear three layers of ballistic plating?), improved accuracy and auto aming...

Shadowcaller

2008-09-06, 03:57 PM

Does anyone know what exactly "muggle machinery" is?
I'd love to know how they disable electricity without disabling the EM force causing themselves to fall apart.

Well that is correct thought, magic in the harry potter books are supposed to "disturb" machinery so it dosen't work. And since its magic you can't really try to expalin it with science...

kpenguin

2008-09-06, 04:02 PM

Well that is correct thought, magic in the harry potter books are supposed to "disturb" machinery so it dosen't work. And since its magic you can't really try to expalin it with science...

They disrupt machinery? How does Harry's watch work then?

EDIT: Or, to make it clear what I mean, are levers nonexistant when they enter a "magic zone"? Do wheels cease to spin? Do gears no longer rub into each other? Do explosions no longer occur when you lite up gunpowder?

averagejoe

2008-09-06, 04:21 PM

They disrupt machinery? How does Harry's watch work then?

EDIT: Or, to make it clear what I mean, are levers nonexistant when they enter a "magic zone"? Do wheels cease to spin? Do gears no longer rub into each other? Do explosions no longer occur when you lite up gunpowder?

Or cameras. Cameras seem like they're pretty firmly in the "machine" category.

DomaDoma

2008-09-06, 05:03 PM

I think we're talking electronics.

Kobold-Bard

2008-09-06, 05:07 PM

I think only electronics break. Clockwork etc still goes just fine. (Post sniped :smallfurious::smallfurious:)

Harry is the good guy, and as such actually gives a crap about civilian casualties, Voldemart does not.

Anyway as for the original question, Harry Potter couldn't defeat Voldemort because he is a 11-17 year old boy going up against a fully grown man with shed loads more experience than him. Would you have asked a kid whos been learning martial arts for a few years to go up against Bruce Lee? No because the kid would be killed.

But that is why people read it. Good beats evil. Better still it does it against overwhelming odds - kids vs adults. (Did anyone watch Avatar? Same thing)

Ditto

2008-09-06, 06:36 PM

Highly magical places 'futz with electronics'. They don't actually render them inoperable by any Anti-Physics field. And there's no reason a regular handgun wouldn't work a Hogwarts, obviously. Old-style cameras or disposables would work just fine I imagine, but not digital cameras or even battery operated auto-reel ones. Wizard cameras use a special alchemical solution to develop pictures, so the fact that it looks like a Muggle camera is largely coindicence.

Pettigrew killed 12 people (13, if you count him). He didn't blow up the gas main to kill them - that was just the excuse they fabricated.

So if you want to stand at 20 paces and take one shot with a wizard, it's possible you could kill him with a handgun. Assuming he doesn't vaporize the bullet en route, or disarm you, or turn your gun into a duck. Or exploding duck with laser eyes. While he does the laundry. :smallamused:

Avatar was a deus ex machina of the highest order. Aang could have defeated the Fire Lord just fine if he wanted to, but instead he had a previously unexplained and unseen attack taught to him in a flashback by a giant lion mountain turtle duck.

averagejoe

2008-09-06, 06:58 PM

I think we're talking electronics.

:smallconfused: So they have to go without the "flash" feature? How do any pictures turn out in castles lit mainly by torches?

So if you want to stand at 20 paces and take one shot with a wizard, it's possible you could kill him with a handgun. Assuming he doesn't vaporize the bullet en route, or disarm you, or turn your gun into a duck. Or exploding duck with laser eyes. While he does the laundry.

I think you overestimate the abilities of wizards. I have a hard time believing a wizard could react fast enough to do whatever before you can shoot, much less hit a bullet in midair with something that goes slow enough for the eye to follow and for a human to dodge. I mean, wand fights are basically gun fights, the only difference being that instead of bullets they fire slo-rays (tm) at you. I'm not saying a person with a gun would win every time, but wizards have hardly been shown as combat masters, even the ones who are good at it.

Oslecamo

2008-09-06, 07:33 PM

The thing is most of the world is, sort of by definition, made up of second raters. Pettigrew killed 13 people. not fifty, and was standing on top of a gas main at the time, which probably doesn't hurt. Imagine how much more damage he could have done with a grenade launcher.

Peter wasn't on top of a gas main, that was the excuse they used to justify the deaths to the muggles.

And he was as much of a second rate wizard as they come. The underdog, an evil Ron.

Also, killing 13 people with a single shot from a grenade launcher would be stretching. They would need to be really clumped togheter

Plus, the grenade launcher is much harder to hide and get, and can't be used for other things.

Zeful

2008-09-06, 08:35 PM

I've thoerized on why no wizard seems to understand muggle technology. Magic makes you not able to understand muggle technology. The more you use it the less you remember/understand. This is why Ron's dad understood nothing of the muggle world/technology despite being the head of the Muggle Antiquities Branch of the Ministry of Magic.

So magic makes you dumber in the HP universe.

GoC

2008-09-06, 08:45 PM

I think only electronics break. Clockwork etc still goes just fine. (Post sniped :smallfurious::smallfurious:)

What I want to know is in what way the EM force is being tampered with. Electricity is actually pretty damn fundamental.

TheElfLord

2008-09-06, 09:22 PM

Only if you're a second rate wizard.

Both Voldy and Dumbleodore more than once in the books defeat several oponents with just one or two spells.

Also remembers that peter Petigrew killed around 50 people with a single curse, whitout harming himself in the process, at close range and Sirius got the blame. Now that's something you'll have an hard time pulling off with personal guns.

So I guess that a pissed off wizard with a wand isn't someone you want to bother.

First it was 12 people (for those saying 13 the 13th was supposed to be Petigrew himself) Secondly this is another example of the major problems/plot holes that arise from trying to analyze Rowling's writing. Petigrew was a clearly second rate wizard, yet was able to blow up a street (to use Fudge's words) and kill multiple people at once. Yet no one else is ever able to do a similar feat. When Voldy wants to kill a room full of people, does he use a damaging spell that kills several at once? No he uses a one shot spell over and over. Rowling wrote in one occurance of being able to kill multiple people at once, then ignores it for the rest of the books. She doesn't care about world consistency as much as being able to tell a story from her own slanted worldview.

To show another related example, does others catch that in Book 3 Fudge was a Junior Minister in the Department of Magical Catastrophes when Black confronted Petigrew. But in Book 4, it is explained that when Crouch's son was convicted as a Death Eater and Crouch's political career was ruined, Fudge was the choice to become Minister of Magic. That's quite the promotion.

Always remember, trying to fit consistency with Rowling is an exercise in futility.

Ditto

2008-09-06, 11:34 PM

What I want to know is in what way the EM force is being tampered with. Electricity is actually pretty damn fundamental.
A wizard did it. MAGIC!

First it was 12 people (for those saying 13 the 13th was supposed to be Petigrew himself) Secondly this is another example of the major problems/plot holes that arise from trying to analyze Rowling's writing. Petigrew was a clearly second rate wizard, yet was able to blow up a street (to use Fudge's words) and kill multiple people at once. Yet no one else is ever able to do a similar feat. When Voldy wants to kill a room full of people, does he use a damaging spell that kills several at once? No he uses a one shot spell over and over. Rowling wrote in one occurance of being able to kill multiple people at once, then ignores it for the rest of the books. She doesn't care about world consistency as much as being able to tell a story from her own slanted worldview.

To show another related example, does others catch that in Book 3 Fudge was a Junior Minister in the Department of Magical Catastrophes when Black confronted Petigrew. But in Book 4, it is explained that when Crouch's son was convicted as a Death Eater and Crouch's political career was ruined, Fudge was the choice to become Minister of Magic. That's quite the promotion.

Always remember, trying to fit consistency with Rowling is an exercise in futility.

It's not hard to blow stuff up. As Oslecamo said, it's hard to kill someone with a grenade launcher, but not impossible if they're close enough together. Similar principle would dictate that if these 12 people were, say, engaging in a team-building activity known as the Human Knot on the sidewalk, they may have been closely packed enough to get caught in such a kaboom. Or something.

You can make a simple slashing motion to produce a slice or a tongue of flame. If the cut is across your knees, ouch. Across your throat, dead. There are many ways in which magic (or any lethal means) can be used where they kill more people than they normally ought. This is going so far down the tangent path...

Rowling is highly consistent, albeit with a few notable exceptions. I don't think the descriptions of Fudge are terrifically incompatible - consider, if he'd taken point on the Pettigrew case (certainly a magical catastrophe), he could have risen to some prominence and perhaps been promoted to Senior Minister in the aftermath. At the time of Crouch's trial, around a year later, someone at a cabinet-level position could certainly be spoken about for Minister of Magic. He didn't get the post for another 8 years, so I'm not sure what conclusions we can draw from it (or how frequently elections are held). Saying someone's a favorite for President today may or may not mean something at the time of an election four years from now.

thegurullamen

2008-09-06, 11:43 PM

Always remember, trying to fit consistency with Rowling is an exercise in futility.

I gotta say I disagree here. Sure, the series is far from perfect. We as geeks know this is true of most sereis' though and usually exploit the fact to kill a few hours when we're bored. JK's series is a lot closer than most writers' work over similar stretches of time/number of publications.

As for the examples you brought up, I thought a gas main was attributed to Petty's "awesome" feat. If not, I'll have to go back and reread it, but I'm sure it was an important mitigating circumstance. As for good ol' Barty, well, it's politics. Connections and/or timing are everything. You can go from complete obscurity to world leader in a very short period of time, especially if you know the right people in times of war/extreme cases like the (heehee) witch hunts of the period. It's not hard to see Barty being such a person. If you think it's unlikely, just remember back to history class. I won't give any real world examples (because they're forbidden and I don't want to invoke Godwin's Law), but I'm sure we could all think of a few historical figures who arose in manners like this.

kpenguin

2008-09-06, 11:55 PM

A wizard did it. MAGIC!

To borrow the words of Discworld's Sam Vimes:

"And that's why I don't like magic, captain. 'Cos it's magic. You can't ask questions, it's magic. It doesn't explain anything, it's magic. You don't know where it comes from, it's magic! That's what I don't like about magic, it does everything by magic!"

What I think GoC wants to know is how it disrupts electricity enough to stop "muggle" technology, but not enough to kill us all by screwing with our electricty-powered nervous system.

TheElfLord

2008-09-07, 12:23 AM

A wizard did it. MAGIC!

It's not hard to blow stuff up. As Oslecamo said, it's hard to kill someone with a grenade launcher, but not impossible if they're close enough together. Similar principle would dictate that if these 12 people were, say, engaging in a team-building activity known as the Human Knot on the sidewalk, they may have been closely packed enough to get caught in such a kaboom. Or something.

You can make a simple slashing motion to produce a slice or a tongue of flame. If the cut is across your knees, ouch. Across your throat, dead. There are many ways in which magic (or any lethal means) can be used where they kill more people than they normally ought. This is going so far down the tangent path...

Rowling is highly consistent, albeit with a few notable exceptions. I don't think the descriptions of Fudge are terrifically incompatible - consider, if he'd taken point on the Pettigrew case (certainly a magical catastrophe), he could have risen to some prominence and perhaps been promoted to Senior Minister in the aftermath. At the time of Crouch's trial, around a year later, someone at a cabinet-level position could certainly be spoken about for Minister of Magic. He didn't get the post for another 8 years, so I'm not sure what conclusions we can draw from it (or how frequently elections are held). Saying someone's a favorite for President today may or may not mean something at the time of an election four years from now.

Where does it say that Fudge doesn't become Minister of Magic for 8 years after the Crouch trial? The passage in the book makes it seem like it happened shortly afterward. If it was 8 years later then that's a fair bit of knowledge Sirius has since he would have been in jail for 8-9 years at the time.

As to her general level of consistancy the biggest issues I see are the things she introduces into latter books that sudent apply to the whole magical word without being present before.

For example:
Silent spells are consider extremely rare in older books (I can only think of 1 before book 6), but from Book 6 on they are considered standard.

Apporation is considered to be so much of a bother that most wizards don't mess with it, but once the cast starts doing it suddenly everyone is constantly apperating.

Patronius are susposed to be difficult, but we see more and more people casting them, then in the final book they get the ability to act as messengers, yet the very knowledgeable Lupin didn't mention it back when we learned about them in book 3.

Jayngfet

2008-09-07, 12:50 AM

Food of any kind being impossible, but live animals are seemingly no problem, and fire, and water.

GoC

2008-09-07, 04:24 AM

What I think GoC wants to know is how it disrupts electricity enough to stop "muggle" technology, but not enough to kill us all by screwing with our electricty-powered nervous system.
Not quite, it's not a case of the being a certain amount you can disrupt the EM force that results in electricity failing but everything else working. More like the other way round as electricity is nowhere near as delicate as many vital cell processes.

Dallas-Dakota

2008-09-07, 04:46 AM

I think I know it.....

A bit off topic but....

The more insane you are, the more magically powerfull you are,

Just think about it, we all know HP has his issues, Dumbledore is a loony old man, Voldemort is a crazy madman.....

The only thing I'm wondering now is if.....Luna Lovegood is the most magically powerful being on the HP world.

Drascin

2008-09-07, 05:51 AM

So if you want to stand at 20 paces and take one shot with a wizard, it's possible you could kill him with a handgun. Assuming he doesn't vaporize the bullet en route, or disarm you, or turn your gun into a duck. Or exploding duck with laser eyes. While he does the laundry. :smallamused

Except that the author herself said that a muggle with a shotgun beats the average wizard almost every time. Her words, not mine.

DomaDoma

2008-09-07, 09:24 AM

For example:
Silent spells are consider extremely rare in older books (I can only think of 1 before book 6), but from Book 6 on they are considered standard.

Apporation is considered to be so much of a bother that most wizards don't mess with it, but once the cast starts doing it suddenly everyone is constantly apperating.

Patronius are susposed to be difficult, but we see more and more people casting them, then in the final book they get the ability to act as messengers, yet the very knowledgeable Lupin didn't mention it back when we learned about them in book 3.

1. You learn them for N.E.W.T.-level courses, then promptly forget about them, unless you're awesome like Snape or Dumbledore. Kind of like higher calculus.

2. Ron's parents are just wimps about it. Apparation is standard wherever we see a non-Apparation-warded part of the wizarding world - see the nameless Harry Potter fanboys from chapter two of book one.

3. If you want to get technical, the Patronus first acted as a messenger in chapter twenty-eight of book four. Lupin didn't mention it because the technique is unique to the Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore having invented it for that purpose.

WarriorTribble

2008-09-07, 10:28 AM

The more insane you are, the more magically powerfull you areDumbledore's sister was pretty messed up and useless. Though maybe this rule only applies to guys? :smalltongue:

black dragoon

2008-09-07, 11:09 AM

I don't know...one the most potent oracles is female and comes off very crazy. It could just be D's sister is incapable of magic do to the fact that she's to I guess broken. Perhaps there is a threshold that balances the whole thing out. I almost think magic in the HP universe is fueled by belief. If that's so then Lovegood really is the most powerful witch ever to grace the face of the earth.:smalleek:

Amber

2008-09-07, 08:41 PM

So I ask my fellow playgrounders this question: Is there any conceivable way Harry could have beaten Voldemort in a one on one match each armed with a wand and no extraordinary circumstances of any sort such as the ones listed above?

No, defenitely not. Experience make the power...assuming Voldy is older than Harry, he had to be more powerful, but in this case I vote for the cliche "goog defeat evil" plus all the love protection stuff. In adittion Harry is not the brilliant wizard in the world...

Manga Shoggoth

2008-09-08, 04:17 AM

Except that the author herself said that a muggle with a shotgun beats the average wizard almost every time. Her words, not mine.

Before the prophecies started coming in to the story my thought was that at the end of the series Vernon would kill Voldemort with his shotgun (or a replacement, since Hagrid bent it).

This would have given the (amusing) picture of the 100% wizard hater being a hero in the wizard world. He would have hated it.

Ditto

2008-09-08, 07:25 AM

This still assumes the wizard is standing within striking distance of a guy with a shotgun, which would be unusual except in case of a surprise attack.

Take a look at the Harry Potter Lexicon, which spells out the Ministers’ terms. Voldemort’s ‘death’/Black’s capture was Halloween 1981. The Crouch/LeStrange trial was 1982. Fudge became Minister in 1990, a year before Harry went to Hogwarts.

DomaDoma covered several points very well, but a little expansion…
If you go back and read through again, there are more silent spells than you think. Since *Harry* never knew about them, he didn’t describe them as such. The story is told from his POV excepting three chapters. There’s a good article on HPLex about how there is strong textual evidence that Snape had been practicing legilimency on Harry throughout the series, but we didn’t know what to make of it until after book 5.

The Weasleys didn’t apparate as much since they had so many kids, so Side-Along apparition was impractical and the Floo network is much easier. I don’t know why you say it was uncommon before book 4 or so – Harry didn’t see many people who did it, but then again he didn’t see many wizards outside of Hogwarts who could have. Other methods of transport are just as common, since there’s a whole bank of fireplaces for Flooing in and out of the Ministry.

As for Patronus messengers, it was an OotP thing as mentioned.

Patronuses are advanced magic, and took a lot of training to get down. They were usually cast by several people, which reinforced one another (Harry and Hermione tag-teamed, as well as the trio outside the Forbidden Forest who saved Harry at the second Battle of Hogwarts). Also, you don’t see ‘everyone’ casting them. You see Order wizards, Umbridge (an accomplished and high-ranking witch, if a *itch), and DA folks. The rank & file don’t know what to do – as we see in the half-blood trials in the Ministry (book 7), many of the people they lead to freedom are amazed at the sight of them.

Fire is pretty straightforward. Animals presumably have some sort of timer on them or stability measure (they poof when killed), as with a Summon X spell in D&D. Same thing with conjured chairs and clothes – this explains why anyone can whip up a chintz arm chair at a whim, but poverty still exists in the wizarding world. You still need someone to put a little permanency magic & artisanship into it.

warty goblin

2008-09-08, 10:14 AM

This still assumes the wizard is standing within striking distance of a guy with a shotgun, which would be unusual except in case of a surprise attack.

People hunt dear with shotguns. Out to a hundred feet or so they really are pretty accurate, whether shooting shot or slugs. Hell I'm no great shot, but even I can hit a man-sized target from 60-70 feet, and slugs really mess something up good. You know, blowing off limbs and all that. 70 feet seems to be pretty extreme range for wizard duals given the calculated speed of their spells.

Ditto

2008-09-08, 10:39 AM

I honestly have no idea how quickly buckshot spreads, only what I see in movies. :smallsmile: Most folks there tend to prefer the sawed-off sorts, for maximum close spread, which seems like it'd be less useful rather quickly as you go farther. Peppered by a bunch of BBs at 70 feet isn't a terrible problem. In any event, tracking someone at a distance means you're sniping same as with a rifle, and wizards don't tend to wander around in meadows. Or in any Muggle settings. You'd have to spot one, calmly walk up to him on the street, and slip your gun out to nonchalantly pop him one. If the wizard sees you, it's Apparate/Protego/Conjure shield/Stupefy/Laundry day. Make sure you kill him on the first try, too, or he'll go back to plan one and apparate just-like-that.

warty goblin

2008-09-08, 01:01 PM

Buckshot is a good bit larger than BBs, remember it was designed to kill deer. 000 or 00 shot is about the size of handgun bullets (9mm or so), are usually packed eight or nine in a shell, and the spread isn't really all that great, something like one foot outward for every thirty feet traveled with a wide open choke. Catching a load of that stuff at a hundred feet would be about like taking four or five pistol bullets at once. Also note that aiming and firing a gun doesn't take that long if you are good, they after all have sights and stuff which make them easier to aim than a wand, and pulling a trigger is much, much faster than speaking an incantation.