What Voldemort should have done. (Slight spoilers)

[Sindre1]

Snip.

This. People need to start paying attention.

 

[WhiteShadow2401]

I believe that the biggest problem with Voldemort, and basically any evil character similar to him, besides stupidity, is the need to kill his nemesis in person. I mean, sure, that?s really anticlimactic and everything? but seriously, is it really necessary? If I?m not wrong, in the fourth book, Goblet of Fire, Voldemort had an infiltrator in Hogwarts (Someone which took the identity of Mad-Eye Moody if I?m not mistaken). So, if I was Voldemort I would simply order my servant: ?Kill the little fucktard in his sleep and let there be happiness for us? (Ok, maybe the happiness part is too much) But seriously? I really don?t understand those baddies that desperately need to kill their enemies face to face.

Personally, I would just want my enemy dead.

 

[Tehpwnsauce]

As I remember things:

#1: At the beginning Voldemort isn't even alive in a conventional sense. Thus the Death Eaters aren't really a factor until he returns and they can rally behind him. The Death Eaters aren't really organized until the third book. Hence why his (Voldemort's) possible resurrection/possesion is a big deal in the first book, and why he is acting indirectly though a fragment of himself left in a book in the second book.

#2: I believe it was mentioned that a very powerful spell was woven to prevent Harry from being located at his uncle's house until he turned 18 which is why the Wizards leave him with those morons despite how they treat him. They also apparently have him under constant suerveillance there at least to begin with which is why his applications to Hogwarts and can't be lost/destroyed by his adopted parents.

#3: At Hogwarts, Harry is under the direct protection of Albus Dumbledore, the most powerful wizard in the world, and the only being that Voldemort fears. Albus is actually stronger than Voldemort, the two have a direct battle in "Order Of The Pheonix" and Dumbledore beats him. Later when Dumbledore dies there are extenuating circumstances, and it took a while for Voldemort to get his guys ready to attack Hogwart's directly.

#4: Only a handfull of people in the Wizarding world know anything about technology, and experimenting with blending magic and tech is specifically prohibited (which is why a certain flying car is a big deal). With rare exceptions everyone is ignorant of it, and "Muggle Studies" goes seriously wrong.

This is why Voldemort doesn't just hijack a couple of nuclear missles, and put a giant mushroom cloud where Hogwart's is.

#5: Voldemort is also not sure what to make of Harry and to begin with doesn't know much about their link so he is cautious. From Voldemort's perspective he was about to annihilate a kid and then went "WTF, I'm suddenly dead".

As far as using curses, curses seem to be generic for very destructive offensive magic, and it's what Wizards use to beat on each other. Him throwing a curse at Harry was akin to putting a gun to his head and pulling the trigger for all intents and purposes.

Also while they didn't cover the exact choreography of what happened, Harry's Mommy and Daddy were apparently pretty powerful (even if Daddy was a jerk as you find out). Voldemort went to fight them in person. It's hard to say what kind of shape he was in when he threw the curse at a certain baby and his mother's power was sufficient to protect him, but reading between the lines I am guessing he was at least a bit ragged around the edges from the fight he was just in.





>>>----Therumancer--->

All daddy did was turn into a stag and run at him, not much of a threat to the ultimate dark wizard.

 

[Tehpwnsauce]

Snip.

This. People need to start paying attention.

Ironic that you think this when people who pay attention to the books, such as myself, notice mistakes in his post.

 

[jcptopi]

Even in the battle in the last book, all either side needed was a few wizards 800m away with Barret M82s.

Funny. I always imagined what it would be like for a SWAT/SEAL/A Team to storm Hogwarts.

 

[Sigel]

Voldemort should have killed Harry in his sleep, with a gun.
But seriously, having to do a zelda-esc gathering quest to kill him in the last book was a really bad move. About a third of that book was them setting up camp, sleeping, waking up, packing up camp, teleporting to a random place and then repeat, over an over, and not advancing the plot in any way until Weasley decided to do the sensible thing and go home.

Hells yeah! The last book was retarded, and the author got a little too character kill happy for my tastes.

 

[Zombie Badger]

But the problem with shooting him is that the wizerds eschew everything muggle, technology-wise. To them, the magic is the important part, so using a gun would be "below" them, especially Voldemort. However, they can use magic to cut things, so why not just use that spell to slit a throat or two? Instead of leaving it to a cursory check from a trusted lieutenant.

I've always wondered this for anyone with telekinesis. Sylar, why the fuck are you throwing doors at someone, when you could make their heart explode, their brain turn to pate or the lower half of their spine strangle them?

I believe that the biggest problem with Voldemort, and basically any evil character similar to him, besides stupidity, is the need to kill his nemesis in person. I mean, sure, that?s really anticlimactic and everything? but seriously, is it really necessary? If I?m not wrong, in the fourth book, Goblet of Fire, Voldemort had an infiltrator in Hogwarts (Someone which took the identity of Mad-Eye Moody if I?m not mistaken). So, if I was Voldemort I would simply order my servant: ?Kill the little fucktard in his sleep and let there be happiness for us? (Ok, maybe the happiness part is too much) But seriously? I really don?t understand those baddies that desperately need to kill their enemies face to face.

Personally, I would just want my enemy dead.

This has always confused me as well. Killing my enemies face to face is a stupid idea when I am the evil emperor of the universe. I like Dragan from Layer Cake's methods. Lure the bastard who wants to kill you to a park, saying that you'll meet them there, hide in a bush with a rifle, and wait for them to do the same looking for you at the meeting place. Simple.

 

[Skreeee]

He makes the mistakes all villains make: he monologues before making any big move.

If evil people would just shut the hell up and act, then there'd be a lot more slit throats in the fictional world. Which would probably mean much shorter books to read in grade school.

 

[historybuff]

Snip.

This. People need to start paying attention.

Seconded.

 

[Nemorov]

He makes the mistakes all villains make: he monologues before making any big move.

If evil people would just shut the hell up and act, then there'd be a lot more slit throats in the fictional world. Which would probably mean much shorter books to read in grade school.

I agree. And there would still be many a good way to go about the narrative. I was also incredibly annoyed at her when she pulled the crap with Harry dying but Dumbledor meeting him in half-way-heaven and sending him back. What the hell was that??? I was of the opinion that the only logical conclusion to the story would have been with Harry's death, and that's what I was expecting from the get go (and certainly not ten chapters in a tent, I might add). As an author I feel you are allowed one, two and the veeeery most, Deus ex machina moments, aka the 'author's OH SNAP WHAT SHOULD I DO button' but she relied heavily on it to the bitter end. The only thing that saved that freakin kid was his incredible luck, and really that should not drive a plot. IRL, luck only holds out for so long and your audience's suspension of disbelief is going to start to waver.

What should have happened: If we must stick with the winging curses at each other... they both cast the death curse at each other, or something like that, and it kills them both. Voldemort's dead, Harry is the tragic hero, blah dee blah.

 

[Therumancer]

Tehpwnsauce:

Actually, a Patronus is a very powerful form of magic. However they never really covered the actual battle between James Potter, his wife, and Voldemorte. Just that when Voldemort came he took up his wand and fought him. It was also mentioned that his most powerful school of magic was Transfigurations.

Later events are something else entirely, I'm talking about when Voldemorte killed himself trying to kill Harry as a baby and gave him the scar.

The actual cause of it was a love powered spell thrown by his mother in her final moments which rebounded Voldemorte's attack back on himself, and accidently created a link with Harry due to the defense mechanisms Voldemorte set up to try and overcome his own death should someone manage to take him down.

Genereally speaking the only one to successfully take him in a straight fight without other extenuating circumstances was Dumbledore.

>>>----Therumancer--->

 

[Mylon]

What the heck are you guys talking about? Voldemort didn't even want to kill Harry. I mean, as long as Harry was alive, Voldemort was immortal. I mean, by being so special and loved that's what made Harry so powerful a horcrux. No one would want to hurt him to kill Voldemort.

So, the reason why Harry wasn't offed early on is pretty obvious.

 

[Zombie Badger]

Snip.

This. People need to start paying attention.

Seconded.

1) True, but this still leaves four books where he is alive.
2) No protection from posting him a letterbomb capable of levelling a street (Can be done, Pettigrew did).
3) Again, owls are not searched until book 5, and Dumbledore is dead for one book, so a sniper at the battle in book 7 could have removed Harry's abdomen.
4) Using a gun does not require magic, and an auto-aim charm would not be too complicated.
5) True, but at the start of book 7, when Voldy attacks Harry on a broom, Voldemort could have magically created a railgun and shot Harry from half a mile away (Some sort of amazing vision charm may be necessary).

What the heck are you guys talking about? Voldemort didn't even want to kill Harry. I mean, as long as Harry was alive, Voldemort was immortal. I mean, by being so special and loved that's what made Harry so powerful a horcrux. No one would want to hurt him to kill Voldemort.

So, the reason why Harry wasn't offed early on is pretty obvious.

So why the repeated attempts to kill him early on? After killing him and Dumbledore, no one would know about the Horcruxes, so he'd be safe.

 

[Therumancer]

Even in the battle in the last book, all either side needed was a few wizards 800m away with Barret M82s.

Funny. I always imagined what it would be like for a SWAT/SEAL/A Team to storm Hogwarts.

To an extent JK Rowling would agree with you, there were laws put into place specifically to keep magic and technology seperate and especially to prevent people from combining the two. The wizards being just as ignorant of "muggles" as vice versa.

However it should be noted that there are two major schools of thought here. On one hand you've got the good wizards who follow the laws and actually police people messing with technology and magic. On the other hand you've got bad wizards who think nothing of muggles and technology and are arrogant enough to go "why bother", and from a certain perspective you can see why as groups like The Ministry Of Magic run around memory wiping people like the protaganists in "Men In Black" whenever something leaks with minimal danger.

There really isn't a middle ground of anyone who embraces the best of both worlds and say runs around with a Sniper Rifle and magic, apporting around and nailing anyone who annoys him from a mile away. Incidently the terrifying thought of something exactly like that is probably why the laws enforced by the Ministry were put into force to begin with.

I mean honestly, you probably actually could kill half of the uber-wizards with an invisibility cloak and a shotgun, but mostly because none of them would see it comics. Everyone in these books is ignorant of something. The only one actually detailed in the books who would be liable to put something like that to use is Hermione, and she just doesn't have that kind of killer instinct.

On the other hand though, also keep in mind that Fred and George were making force field projectors (magical) in the back of their Joke shop for the Ministry Of Magic/Order Of The Pheonix once the threat of returning Death Eaters was being somewhat accepted. Truthfully a prepared combat mage (Auror or whatever) wearing something like that might be bullet proof. Their existance was mentioned, but none were ever actually mentioned being used in the storyline.

It's *possible* that your wizards with barret light .50s might simply give their positions away if they were to attack someone with something like that (needing magic to take down the protective field).

 

[Zombie Badger]

Even in the battle in the last book, all either side needed was a few wizards 800m away with Barret M82s.

Funny. I always imagined what it would be like for a SWAT/SEAL/A Team to storm Hogwarts.

Snip.

True, but all the people in the books are pointlessly crippling themselves. Also, a shotgun would be a bad idea, as the sound would give you away, and a group of Death Eaters could hit you 50 yards away. A Barret M82, an invisibility cloak, and something to deaden the sound and muzzle flash would be amazing. Also, no wizard would expect you to use guns, and wouldn't plan for it.

 

[InvisibleMilk]

Even in the battle in the last book, all either side needed was a few wizards 800m away with Barret M82s.

Funny. I always imagined what it would be like for a SWAT/SEAL/A Team to storm Hogwarts.

Snip.

True, but all the people in the books are pointlessly crippling themselves. Also, a shotgun would be a bad idea, as the sound would give you away, and a group of Death Eaters could hit you 50 yards away. A Barret M82, an invisibility cloak, and something to deaden the sound and muzzle flash would be amazing. Also, no wizard would expect you to use guns, and wouldn't plan for it.

He wouldn't even need that much planning!
Teleport spell *pop*
"Hey Harry, it's me!"
Point blank with any sort of firearm
*BLAMBLAMBLAMBLAMBLAMBLAM*

 

[timmytom1]

The problem with the Harry Potter books is that, like bond films, the villains are, if you think about it, stupid. When I was reading them, I was thinking 'Why does Voldemort bother with all this curse bollocks? There are far better ways of killing Harry'. Why not post him a letterbomb? Or just teleport him somewhere and shoot him in the back. All the wizards have, killing people-wise is a curse that can be dodged, is difficult to aim (the lack of iron sights on a wand make it pretty crap) and is easy to see! Us muggles have been coming up with ways to kill each other easily and remotely for centuries. Even in the battle in the last book, all either side needed was a few wizards 800m away with Barret M82s.

I find that the problem with books that have magic or supernatural creatures but are set in the real world, is that for the hero to win, the bad guy has to be stupid, or the hero would die in the first paragraph - Watchmen points this out beautifully. Are there any ways of getting around this problem?

He`s a villan and villans are reknowned for their inability to just finish things off the simple way

 

[NeutralDrow]

*sigh*

Yes, Voldemort doesn't exactly follow every aspect of the Evil Overlord list. We've heard it a million times.

The problem with the Harry Potter books is that, like bond films, the villains are, if you think about it, stupid. When I was reading them, I was thinking 'Why does Voldemort bother with all this curse bollocks? There are far better ways of killing Harry'. Why not post him a letterbomb? Or just teleport him somewhere and shoot him in the back. All the wizards have, killing people-wise is a curse that can be dodged, is difficult to aim (the lack of iron sights on a wand make it pretty crap) and is easy to see! Us muggles have been coming up with ways to kill each other easily and remotely for centuries. Even in the battle in the last book, all either side needed was a few wizards 800m away with Barret M82s.

Even aside from Rowling saying flat-out that a guy with a shotgun is a match one-on-one with most wizards, England has some pretty severe gun control laws in real life, and wizards in the Potterverse mostly disdain muggle technology. Why on earth would one of the world's biggest racists change his policy for that?

Seriously, if you're going to complain about the villain, complain about something that can't be easily explained away.

I find that the problem with books that have magic or supernatural creatures but are set in the real world, is that for the hero to win, the bad guy has to be stupid, or the hero would die in the first paragraph - Watchmen points this out beautifully. Are there any ways of getting around this problem?

Don't read fiction?

Others.
Yes, Voldemort should have been willing to make more Horcruxes...or should he? Even aside from the motivation of "7 is a magical number," how many times can you split your soul in half before you become non-functional? Yes, he could have hidden them better (well...not so much "better" as "more randomly"), but he was an arrogant sociopath obsessed with his perceived history and legitimacy as the last of the line of Slytherin and his own magical studies. Simpler terms: he's a pack rat, but he only used stuff that was important to him, and typically hid the things in places where they'd be nearly impossible to find without many years of detective work.

He makes the mistakes all villains make: he monologues before making any big move.

If evil people would just shut the hell up and act, then there'd be a lot more slit throats in the fictional world. Which would probably mean much shorter books to read in grade school.

I agree. And there would still be many a good way to go about the narrative. I was also incredibly annoyed at her when she pulled the crap with Harry dying but Dumbledor meeting him in half-way-heaven and sending him back. What the hell was that??? I was of the opinion that the only logical conclusion to the story would have been with Harry's death, and that's what I was expecting from the get go (and certainly not ten chapters in a tent, I might add). As an author I feel you are allowed one, two and the veeeery most, Deus ex machina moments, aka the 'author's OH SNAP WHAT SHOULD I DO button' but she relied heavily on it to the bitter end. The only thing that saved that freakin kid was his incredible luck, and really that should not drive a plot. IRL, luck only holds out for so long and your audience's suspension of disbelief is going to start to waver.

You missed the whole part about the Resurrection Stone? It's not like it was an artifact that was not only explained in detail and worked almost exactly as explained, or that it's one of the things in the book title, or anything...

And yes, Voldemort monologues. If you're not only colossally arrogant, but immortal to boot, you can do that.

What should have happened: If we must stick with the winging curses at each other... they both cast the death curse at each other, or something like that, and it kills them both. Voldemort's dead, Harry is the tragic hero, blah dee blah.

I doubt Harry's even strong enough to use the killing curse. They pointed that out in book 4.

Snip.

This. People need to start paying attention.

Ironic that you think this when people who pay attention to the books, such as myself, notice mistakes in his post.

What mistake did you notice? Looked all right to me.

 

[Ridonculous_Ninja]

But the problem with shooting him is that the wizerds eschew everything muggle, technology-wise. To them, the magic is the important part, so using a gun would be "below" them, especially Voldemort. However, they can use magic to cut things, so why not just use that spell to slit a throat or two? Instead of leaving it to a cursory check from a trusted lieutenant.

I've always wondered this for anyone with telekinesis. Sylar, why the fuck are you throwing doors at someone, when you could make their heart explode, their brain turn to pate or the lower half of their spine strangle them?

I believe that the biggest problem with Voldemort, and basically any evil character similar to him, besides stupidity, is the need to kill his nemesis in person. I mean, sure, that?s really anticlimactic and everything? but seriously, is it really necessary? If I?m not wrong, in the fourth book, Goblet of Fire, Voldemort had an infiltrator in Hogwarts (Someone which took the identity of Mad-Eye Moody if I?m not mistaken). So, if I was Voldemort I would simply order my servant: ?Kill the little fucktard in his sleep and let there be happiness for us? (Ok, maybe the happiness part is too much) But seriously? I really don?t understand those baddies that desperately need to kill their enemies face to face.

Personally, I would just want my enemy dead.

This has always confused me as well. Killing my enemies face to face is a stupid idea when I am the evil emperor of the universe. I like Dragan from Layer Cake's methods. Lure the bastard who wants to kill you to a park, saying that you'll meet them there, hide in a bush with a rifle, and wait for them to do the same looking for you at the meeting place. Simple.

The Avatar: The Last Airbender show, he fights his enemies by blowing pitiful little gusts of wind at them.

BLOW UP THEIR LUNGS! See how well they fight when they are surrounded by a vacuum, or their lungs have so much air they burst.

People don't know how to use their powers.

Voldemort can set people on fire with a thought, his weakling minion (the rat guy, can't remember his name) blew up an entire street AND THAT WAS JUST TO ESCAPE SOMEONE!.

He has the magical equivalent of a grenade at his finger tips, and decides to use the magical equivalent of a sniper rifle against a baby a foot in front of him.

He really should've just blown up the entire house or set it on fire. Or imperiused Harry's parents to kill each other...

 

[Arkhangelsk]

J.K Rowling is a great author, but the characterization of Voldemort and the ways he is determined to kill Harry sometimes give the feeling that he's a bit over dramatic.