Rowling is a hypocritical idiot. She wrote Harry Potter one way then completely contradicts what she has told in the story.
Example: Harry and Dumbledore both stated that Snape was the Bravest man the have ever known. Then in an interview when asked about Snape she said something along the line of Snape was just a sniviling coward.
What she says means nothing to me
Originally posted by siriuswriter
Once again, I got that information from JK Rowling herself, per interview. Whatever JK says is super-canon.
Actual feats matter, not what the author says. What specific feats does Godric have to put him above Voldemort?
Originally posted by Bentley
Going by feats and by the books, Voldemort is Superior to everyone short of Dumbledore and maybe Grimwald with the Elder Wand.
I'd actually argue Voldemort is superior to even Dumbledore. Dumbledore even with the unbeatable wand couldn't actually defeat Voldemort. So wouldn't it be silly to think Dumbledore, based on his own innate power, is above Voldy? The fact he could go up against someone so powerful who also had an incredibly potent magical artifact really says a lot.
Just like Grindelwald with the elder wand was still unable to defeat Dumbledore..so it would definitely mean Voldemort is above Grindelwald since he didn't have the luxury of an super power wand when he fought him.
Though I do wonder how much of a boost the elder wand truly gives you. Dumbledore says him and Grindelwald were more or less even, but then says he is probably a bit more skilled. So you'd think if Dumbledore is only a bit more skilled..that getting the elder wand would of tipped the balance back into Grindelwalds favor, right?
Originally posted by Surtur
Actual feats matter, not what the author says. What specific feats does Godric have to put him above Voldemort?I'd actually argue Voldemort is superior to even Dumbledore. Dumbledore even with the unbeatable wand couldn't actually defeat Voldemort. So wouldn't it be silly to think Dumbledore, based on his own innate power, is above Voldy? The fact he could go up against someone so powerful who also had an incredibly potent magical artifact really says a lot.
Just like Grindelwald with the elder wand was still unable to defeat Dumbledore..so it would definitely mean Voldemort is above Grindelwald since he didn't have the luxury of an super power wand when he fought him.
Though I do wonder how much of a boost the elder wand truly gives you. Dumbledore says him and Grindelwald were more or less even, but then says he is probably a bit more skilled. So you'd think if Dumbledore is only a bit more skilled..that getting the elder wand would of tipped the balance back into Grindelwalds favor, right?
Have to argue against that, actually.
Author's word is > The Source Material because the Author is the creator of the Source Material, but that still doesn't necessarily mean that Godric is above Voldemort, just that he'd give him one hell of a fight.
I could see Merlin being a bigger threat to Voldemort then Dumbledore though.
Apparently Godric was able to take on the Slytherin Basilisk and Salazar Slytherin at the same time, so thats something.
You could actually blame HIM for the Chamber of Secrets, cause that was the result of Salazar's defeat.
Originally posted by Surtur
I'd actually argue Voldemort is superior to even Dumbledore. Dumbledore even with the unbeatable wand couldn't actually defeat Voldemort. So wouldn't it be silly to think Dumbledore, based on his own innate power, is above Voldy? The fact he could go up against someone so powerful who also had an incredibly potent magical artifact really says a lot.Just like Grindelwald with the elder wand was still unable to defeat Dumbledore..so it would definitely mean Voldemort is above Grindelwald since he didn't have the luxury of an super power wand when he fought him.
Though I do wonder how much of a boost the elder wand truly gives you. Dumbledore says him and Grindelwald were more or less even, but then says he is probably a bit more skilled. So you'd think if Dumbledore is only a bit more skilled..that getting the elder wand would of tipped the balance back into Grindelwalds favor, right?
Keep in mind that the Dumbledore that Voldemort fought had the disadvantage of needing to protect Harry and was arguably past his prime. The scuffle they had was also rather brief, most duels in the series even among peers tend to drag a lot longer than that, powerful artifact or not.
In the books Dumbledore was effortlessly fending off Voldemort without resorting to powerful/devastating magic that we know he can use, but would've been risky given the circumstances. It was almost as if Albus didn't even need to look at Tom to keep up with him, he was an elemental force.
Originally posted by Surtur
In the books Dumbledore still was stalemated though, despite having the Elder Wand. As for past his prime, I don't know. For me that point happened once he f*cked up his hand. Which admittedly wasn't long after the fight with Voldemort.
Voldemort defended himself but still got caught in the water sphere and was pressed by Dumbledore in every attack. It's generous to think he could've done any better in the long run, against an old Dumbledore (let's not talk about the young more powerful Grindelwald fought).
Originally posted by Surtur
Yeah but what about that wizard that lived for like..10,000 years? That kind of makes Voldemort and Dumbledore look like little kids standing next to a dinosaur. I mean some wizard somehow just..lived for thousands and thousands of years.
I'm not sure I've ever heard of a wizard living that long. The oldest I know of was one Barry Winkle, who lived to be about 750, and Nicolas Flamel, the creator of the Philosopher's Stone, but he was less than 700 years old. He probably attained a great wealth of knowledge, yes, but in terms of combat applicability and natural talent?
A line of comparison would be Yoda living nearly a millennium yet still being bested by Sidious in combat.
Okay yeah I'm not sure why I thought he lived for 10,000 years.
Originally posted by EmperorSidious2
You wanna debate that?
Debate when Dumbledore became past his prime? But there really wouldn't be anyway to prove he did reach such a state prior to his incident with the cursed ring. I'm not saying that is guaranteed that it started to happen around the time of the ring curse incident either.