What Voldemort should have done. (Slight spoilers)

Recommended Videos

RivFader86

New member
Jul 3, 2009
396
0
0
Lord Krunk said:
Everything you said there was correct, but you have to remember that most of Dumbledore's power came from his wand (as you find out in Book 7).
So...if you want to eat a cake but someone with a shotgun is protecting it do you say "oh shotgun better stay away" or say to yourself "meh he's powerless without his shotgun..." run up to him while he's holding it and get shot in the head?
 

G1eet

New member
Mar 25, 2009
2,090
0
0
MaxTheReaper said:
B) Taunt the police with artfully displayed corpses and engage in a game of cat-and-mouse.
This reminds me of that Fringe episode...
 

blindey

New member
Dec 30, 2008
120
0
0
Mylon said:
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.
Wrong. What the heck are YOU talking about? When Voldemort killed harry's parents the curse broke his physical body and he was basically a spirit/ghost/etheral, whatever you wanna call it. That was the whole point behind him wanting to steal the sorcerer's stone in the first book and whatnot. Secondly...There wasn't any actual *evidence* that he (Voldemort) knew Harry was a part of him (at least initially). The reason he wanted to kill him was because of the whole prophecy business (that was self-fulfilling :3)
 

Mylon

New member
Jan 8, 2008
49
0
0
MaxTheReaper said:
A) Dump the body somewhere it'll never be found (in the ocean, for instance, like Dexter,)
or
B) Taunt the police with artfully displayed corpses and engage in a game of cat-and-mouse.
Option b is your typical fun to read novel. Option a is a boring business-like mob hit.
 

Altorin

Jack of No Trades
May 16, 2008
6,976
0
0
MaxTheReaper said:
Mylon said:
I think it'd be fun to read a story about a 2nd gen villian. One that reads the story of ones before him and planes a little better ahead of time.
You don't even need to do that.
You just need a villain with common fucking sense.

Seriously - if I were going to kill someone in real life, would I:

A) Dump the body somewhere it'll never be found (in the ocean, for instance, like Dexter,)
or
B) Taunt the police with artfully displayed corpses and engage in a game of cat-and-mouse.

Nurrr I fucking wonder.
To the ocean we go!

Things like that are so simple.
Altorin said:
seriously, it's explained pretty thoroughly that making horcruxes was a very very personal experience. The objects that become horcruxes have to be personal items, and You don't put it somewhere where it can be destroyed.

Horcruxes are a huge part of fiction. Liches have phylacteries, which house their wouls. They keep them in the most protected of locations... anyone who would go through the trouble of shattering their soul into many pieces (Noone had done more then one before Voldemort, and he did 7), isn't going to just throw those peices away and hope that noone will find them.
It's been a while, but I was under the impression that he purposefully gathered rare and valuable items, but that it wasn't required to do so.

And, I would.
I mispoke.. it doesn't NEED to be, like the spell will work with a dirty boot, it's sort of like making a port key

But it definitely wouldn't be. The person who'd do something like making a horcrux would want to show, even just to themselves, that it's some vital, personal thing, and as such would invariably chose something close to them.
 

space_oddity

New member
Oct 24, 2008
514
0
0
Ridonculous_Ninja said:
He really should've just blown up the entire house or set it on fire. Or imperiused Harry's parents to kill each other...
I've always wondered about that. I mean, if you were the most evil wanker to ever hold a wand, wouldnt you burn your enemies to death, or turn them inside out, or suck all their blood out of their assholes etc? I mean, Imperius is just a quick, almost mercifully painless death.
Hardly evil at all.
 

NeutralDrow

New member
Mar 23, 2009
9,097
0
0
space_oddity said:
Ridonculous_Ninja said:
He really should've just blown up the entire house or set it on fire. Or imperiused Harry's parents to kill each other...
I've always wondered about that. I mean, if you were the most evil wanker to ever hold a wand, wouldnt you burn your enemies to death, or turn them inside out, or suck all their blood out of their assholes etc? I mean, Imperius is just a quick, almost mercifully painless death.
Hardly evil at all.
Imperius is the mind control spell.

And he wasn't hung up over being evil so much as being feared. Sure he could burn places down, but that's a little flashy, and not really guaranteed, to boot. Much better to slip in, kill someone, leave your calling card, and leave. If he wanted to torture someone for shits and giggles, that's what Cruciatis was for.
 

Julianking93

New member
May 16, 2009
14,715
0
0
dontworryaboutit said:
Fat_Hippo said:
Yeah, kill the good guy in the first paragraph and then write a book about the evil guy. Much more interesting that way.
Voldemort was a much more interesting and compelling character. He had more depth.

Harry was just an angsty teen.
This. That little emo acting fuck. And he's just gotten worse over time, but goddamn it all to hell, I can't stop watching them.
 

NeutralDrow

New member
Mar 23, 2009
9,097
0
0
Julianking93 said:
dontworryaboutit said:
Fat_Hippo said:
Yeah, kill the good guy in the first paragraph and then write a book about the evil guy. Much more interesting that way.
Voldemort was a much more interesting and compelling character. He had more depth.

Harry was just an angsty teen.
This. That little emo acting fuck. And he's just gotten worse over time, but goddamn it all to hell, I can't stop watching them.
He does have reasons, you know.

It's also kind of an ironic twist to be talking about a hero acting too realistically, in a thread dedicated to complaining about a villain not being realistic enough (supposedly).
 

Julianking93

New member
May 16, 2009
14,715
0
0
NeutralDrow said:
Julianking93 said:
dontworryaboutit said:
Fat_Hippo said:
Yeah, kill the good guy in the first paragraph and then write a book about the evil guy. Much more interesting that way.
Voldemort was a much more interesting and compelling character. He had more depth.

Harry was just an angsty teen.
This. That little emo acting fuck. And he's just gotten worse over time, but goddamn it all to hell, I can't stop watching them.
He does have reasons, you know.

It's also kind of an ironic twist to be talking about a hero acting too realistically, in a thread dedicated to complaining about a villain not being realistic enough (supposedly).
I know he has reasons, I'd be the same way if my parents were killed :b, but I'm not complaining that the villain was not realistic enough, it's a fucking book about wizards and witches, how realistic am I gonna expect.

I actually like Voldemort though.
 

NeutralDrow

New member
Mar 23, 2009
9,097
0
0
Julianking93 said:
NeutralDrow said:
Julianking93 said:
dontworryaboutit said:
Fat_Hippo said:
Yeah, kill the good guy in the first paragraph and then write a book about the evil guy. Much more interesting that way.
Voldemort was a much more interesting and compelling character. He had more depth.

Harry was just an angsty teen.
This. That little emo acting fuck. And he's just gotten worse over time, but goddamn it all to hell, I can't stop watching them.
He does have reasons, you know.

It's also kind of an ironic twist to be talking about a hero acting too realistically, in a thread dedicated to complaining about a villain not being realistic enough (supposedly).
I know he has reasons, I'd be the same way if my parents were killed :b, but I'm not complaining that the villain was not realistic enough, it's a fucking book about wizards and witches, how realistic am I gonna expect.
Yeah, I realized that immediately after I hit "post," and tried to change it to less of an accusation than a musing.

And I think a conversation of TV Tropes' <url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/JustBugsMe/HarryPotter>"Just Bugs Me" page got it down.

Why is Harry such a jackass from book five onwards?

* Part of Voldemort's soul was inside him.
* And he's a teenager.
* And people keep killing his loved ones without warning. Gets to a man.
* And the entire country thinking that he was nuts for most of book five and the most wanted wizard in the country in book seven didn't help much either.
* Not to mention the fact that the most shit-scary evil wizard in all wizardom - the same one who killed his parents, no less - has come back from the dead and is gunning for him personally. I'd be a bit on edge.
* I think the annoyance with Harry is more due to the fact that he is a jackass at the wrong times. For instance, in the fifth book, he is at his whiniest because Cedric is dead (he didn't even like Cedric), and because people don't like him (the school turns against him pretty much once a book anyway). However, after his godfather/father figure is killed he is much much much less whiny, so he basically looks like an idiot for whining all the time before, or a jerk for not whining more once Sirius is dead. At least, that's why I want to smack Harry's head into a wall in the later books.
** Cedric's death doesn't upset Harry because he liked him. Cedric's death upsets Harry because Harry feels that Cedric's death is his fault. One of Harry's more common coping mechanisms for guilt is to take it out on everyone around him.
** And I think that Sirius' death made Harry realize that it's more than him, hence less whining. It lasted almost until the start of the next book.
* He's lost any trust he ever had in established procedure and authority... which admittedly wasn't much. When said authority tells him stuff like "be nice" and "don't torture people", he's less likely to listen than before.
* PTSD. In addition to the things already mentioned (having a psychopath trying to kill him, and killing all his loved ones, and having a direct link into said psychopath's brain), Harry spent the first 13 years of his life in a physically and emotionally abusive family, and is basically the wizarding world's equivilant of a child celebrity. Really, it's a miracle that he isn't MORE messed up than he is.
* I think the Potter Puppet Pals summed it up the best:

Harry: My parents are dead, my life sucks, I can't hold down a girlfriend, and I'm surrounded by f**king goblins and sh*t all the time! I mean, what the f*ck?!?

* Indeed. In the final book, he's got intense support from a number of different factions, and he doesn't bother to even say "thank you" when someone helps him. He's arrogant and ungrateful and pretty much a jerk.
* While all the rationales for him being a jerk are fair, I think that a part of Harry's problems is that he tends to react to stress by introverting and becoming hostile to those around him (even those who are his friends and mean well). It's part of what makes the characters interesting in that, for the most part, they all have good and bad parts to them.
 

Tehpwnsauce

New member
Apr 30, 2009
389
0
0
Therumancer said:
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--->
Firstly I said nothing about Patronui(I'm unsure of the multipule of partonus) so why are you even bringing it up.Okay I've just looked it up in the deathly hallows(page 281 if you wanna check) and what actually happens is James just runs at voldemort without his wand no spells, no magic nothinng, just running straight at a wizard who can turn you inside out with a flick of his wrist. Not the best move.

Oh and please quote me in future when you directly challenge my points, just so I know that you've responded.
 

Syntax Error

New member
Sep 7, 2008
2,323
0
0
NoMoreSanity said:
You know it would be cool to kill Harry as soon as Voldemort found out about him, than write the books from his perspective as he takes over the Wizard World with ease.
I would be a fan of the Harry Potter universe (but then, if this did happen, it would be Voldemort Universe) if this actually pushed through.
 

Jenkins

New member
Dec 4, 2007
1,091
0
0
harry potter bubble hearths...

also, I would intertwine my bullets in A MP-5 with the death curses... just throwing it out there.