Originally posted by Robtard
So they can't cast spells while invisible.Let's see the half-app + casting.
Well, you're right, there's no way to prove that they can cast spells while invisible. For all we know the invisibility is a spell, and casting two at the same time, well, even wizards have limits.
Half apparating and casting fiendfyre:
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Well, you're right, there's no way to prove that they can cast spells while invisible. For all we know the invisibility is a spell, and casting two at the same time, well, even wizards have limits.Half apparating and casting fiendfyre:
1) What LL said above
2) So they can crash into the ground and make some fire. Oh no, an entire legion of blaster wielding soldiers is doomed! The Force knows they've never encountered fire before.
I rest my case, it's a matter of numbers. Some wizard is busy killing, burning, shrinking a handful of clones; another troop of clones turns that wizard into butter.
If you want to save some face for HP, debate how well/how many clones would go down in the 501st before HP loses.
Originally posted by RobtardSplitting hairs?
1) What LL said above
2) So they can crash into the ground and make some fire. Oh no, an entire legion of blaster wielding soldiers is doomed! The Force knows they've never encountered fire before.No, Rob. They fired big ass comets of fire while half apparating hundreds of feet high.
Blaster bolts pass right through them. Not that it matters, tech doesn't work on Hogwarts. Not that it matters, the shield charm will deflect any and all attacks the Clones throw at them.
I rest my case, it's a matter of numbers. Some wizard is busy killing, burning, shrinking a handful of clones; another troop of clones turns that wizard into butter.No. See, they are half apparating, they cast the fiendfyre or whatever you wanna call it, they apparate away. Blaster bolts pass right through them.
If you want to save some face for HP, debate how well/how many clones would go down in the 501st before HP loses.
All of them.
Originally posted by Rogue JediWhich matters. Fiendyre is a manifestation of Dark Magic, hence it's affiliation with Voldemort and it's ability to destroy Horcruxes. A spell that simply creates fire however, no matter the pattern or style it's in, is just regular fire. And against Jedi, regular fire can be swept aside with their Force powers. But since they can't block or alter magic, they can't do shit against Fiendfyre.
It's pointless. It does everything that fiendfyre does. Only thing up for debate is the name.
The stuff in those clips you've posted are all unnamed. The only definitive application of Fiendfyre will be when Crabbe uses it in DH II. Once we see what that looks like and how it behaves, we'll be able to make a closer call.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Which matters. Fiendyre is a manifestation of Dark Magic, hence it's affiliation with Voldemort and it's ability to destroy Horcruxes. A spell that simply creates fire however, no matter the pattern or style it's in, is just regular fire. And against Jedi, regular fire can be swept aside with their Force powers. But since they can't block or alter magic, they can't do shit against Fiendfyre.The stuff in those clips you've posted are all unnamed. The only definitive application of Fiendfyre will be when Crabbe uses it in DH II. Once we see what that looks like and how it behaves, we'll be able to make a closer call.
I thought that the gigantic fire storm in HBP that Dumbles did, to destroy the zombies, was fiendfyre.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Neither the book nor movie name it as such.
Lacking a name but posessing multiple characteristics of Fiendfyre makes it seem like a pretty strong case of Fiendfyre, imo.
Among HP fans, it is considered a "strong possibility" but it is wrong to wholly conclude that it is not fiendfyre as it is to say that it was definitely fiendfyre. I simply see evidence supporting it as fiendfyre and nothing to contradict that besides the lack of a bestial form or someone calling it fiendfyre.
Originally posted by dadudemonOkay. Dumbledore using advanced Dark Magic when simple fire sufficed is kinda weird. It's also jumping to conclusions.
Lacking a name but posessing multiple characteristics of Fiendfyre makes it seem like a pretty strong case of Fiendfyre, imo.Among HP fans, it is considered a "strong possibility" but it is wrong to wholly conclude that it is not fiendfyre as it is to say that it was definitely fiendfyre. I simply see evidence supporting it as fiendfyre and nothing to contradict that besides the lack of a bestial form or someone calling it fiendfyre.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Okay. Dumbledore using advanced Dark Magic when simple fire sufficed is kinda weird. It's also jumping to conclusions.
Simple fire did not suffice, not even close.
And since when is it bad for Dumbles do dark magic? He was one of the very few that could not care less about mentioning Volds name and learning about all sorts of magic: even the forbidden stuff.
Originally posted by dadudemonEquivocation (I'm gonna see use for that word a lot now). "Simple" fire from a wizard's perspective. Specifically, the spell Dumbledore used is called Firestorm (at least according to the wiki). The book itself doesn't name what Dumbledore did. The book also never states exactly what "kind" of fire Inferi are weak against. They simply say they are vulnerable to "fire". Firestorm.
Simple fire did not suffice, not even close.
Originally posted by dadudemonSince he was the champion opponent of the Dark Arts since his defeat of Grindlewald and being the core nemesis to Voldemort (Potter notwithstanding). It's for the same reason why Dumbledore isn't in the business of murdering, kidnapping, extorting, or torturing people. Evil and the Dark Arts aren't in his character.
And since when is it bad for Dumbles do dark magic? He was one of the very few that could not care less about mentioning Volds name and learning about all sorts of magic: even the forbidden stuff.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Equivocation (I'm gonna see use for that word a lot now). "Simple" fire from a wizard's perspective. Specifically, the spell Dumbledore used is called Firestorm (at least according to the wiki). The book itself doesn't name what Dumbledore did. The book also never states exactly what "kind" of fire Inferi are weak against. They simply say they are vulnerable to "fire". Firestorm.
Wiki also indicates that it is a strong candidate for Fiendfyre due obvious reasons of it being very similar to fiendfyre.
Since I can edit the wiki, it is only semblences that should be used and the fire has a large overlap into fiendfyre.
It is safer to say it is fiendfyre than it is to say it is something other than fiendfyre.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Since he was the champion opponent of the Dark Arts since his defeat of Grindlewald and being the core nemesis to Voldemort (Potter notwithstanding). It's for the same reason why Dumbledore isn't in the business of murdering, kidnapping, extorting, or torturing people. Evil and the Dark Arts aren't in his character.
You have it exactly backwards. BECAUSE he is against evil, he knows quite a bit about dark arts...second only to Voldy. On top of this, magic used by dark wizards is not iherently dark: fiendfyre is considered dark magic because of how destructive it is but it is definitely not an evil magic, alone: it has become associated with evil due to the uses of it. But, because it can be used to destroy a dark magic, horcruxes, you could call it a "light art" assuming the subjective notion that horcruxes are evil (when, objectively, they really are not evil at all.)
Dumbles is quite the naughty wizard, as well. An older, wiser, more intelligent James Potter, imo.