Avengers vs Death Eaters

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
My little brother can't rip a t-shirt. They're pretty durable to him. The spell had no effect on the shirt. I would like to give a better answer, but like I said, the harry potter movies are lacking in mech suits.

AK bounced off the chest of a golden statue.

"But the headless golden statue of the wizard in the fountain had sprung alive, leaping from its plinth to land with a crash on the floor between Harry and Voldemort. The spell merely glanced off its chest as the statue flung out its arms to protect Harry."

Shows that metal can deflect AK.this is in the books, tho.

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
My little brother can't rip a t-shirt. They're pretty durable to him. The spell had no effect on the shirt. I would like to give a better answer, but like I said, the harry potter movies are lacking in mech suits.

A shirt is nowhere near as durable as the objects we've seen stop spells(including the AK) so if you're going to claim that wearing objects that have been proven to stop spells would render their durability worthless, you have to provide proof.

Spells in the HP universe also look like they tend to be aim/LOS and tagetting dependent and not auto-hitting or tracking in nature. Such as the spell fight between Potter and random bad guys in the diner wherethey were using cover and missing a lot at short range. Can anyone confirm/disprove this?

I gave two examples of the stuff wizards whear put up no resistance to spells. You want another one? In the second movie, harry lost all the bones in his hand despite whearing a leather clove. It's not my fault that the wizards don't just walk around in chainmail and plate armor.

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
I gave two examples of the stuff wizards whear put up no resistance to spells. You want another one? In the second movie, harry lost all the bones in his hand despite whearing a leather clove. It's not my fault that the wizards don't just walk around in chainmail and plate armor.

Do you have any proof that things durable enough to stop the AK would become worthless if worn?

Also, Lockhart moved Harry's sleeve out of the way and cast his spell on Harry's arm

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Spells in the HP universe also look like they tend to be aim/LOS and tagetting dependent and not auto-hitting or tracking in nature. Such as the spell fight between Potter and random bad guys in the diner wherethey were using cover and missing a lot at short range. Can anyone confirm/disprove this?

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
hermoine teleported both ron and harry away from the wedding. She had one of the boys' arms in each of her hand.

They teleported away in the same way a portkey would teleport them. Granted thats magic but it's not the same as "slinging spells". Thats like saying they were flying on brooms without using their wands.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Do you have any proof that things durable enough to stop the AK would become worthless if worn?

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
They teleported away in the same way a portkey would teleport them. Granted thats magic but it's not the same as "slinging spells". Thats like saying they were flying on brooms without using their wands.

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
in the first movie, hermoine says that the wizard must keep eye contact during the casting. You can fire at random, but as long as you see the target during the entire casting procedure(swish and incantation sometimes optional) the spell should hit.

Eye contact is NOT "as long as you see the target" by definition. It means that two people should look into each other's eyes at the same time. You're talking about maintaining line of sight w/c is NOT eye contact.

Also, it's been shown in books and (I think) in movies that spells are dodgeable. Am i correct?

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
do you have proof that the material of the object worn effects the spell?

I have proof that durable objects have blocked spells, you're claiming that act of wearing something renders it's durability worthless.

Again, do you have any proof?

hermoine said eye contact. But line of sight probably is what she meant.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I have proof that durable objects have blocked spells, you're claiming that act of wearing something renders it's durability worthless.

Again, do you have any proof?

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
hermoine said eye contact. But line of sight probably is what she meant.

2 completely different terms man. You can't change the meaning of words or what characters meant just so it could fit a definition you like. Especially if there has been instances to the latter (the diner fight).

Well harry was jumping and turning and the broom doesn't have eyes. When they looked away the curse stopped. That's all I got.

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
Voldemort shoots lilly's shirt with AK. Shirt fine. Lilly dead.
Harry shoots malfoy's shirt with SS. Shirt fine. Malfoy bleeding.
Lockheart fires a bonless charm at harry's arm. Leather glove fine. Arm boneless.

So cloth, cloth and leather doesn't stop spells? However:

Golden statue deflects AK spell. Conjured silver shield by Voldy deflects DD's spell.

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
Voldemort shoots lilly's shirt with AK. Shirt fine. Lilly dead.
Harry shoots malfoy's shirt with SS. Shirt fine. Malfoy bleeding.
Lockheart fires a bonless charm at harry's arm. Leather glove fine. Arm boneless.

First off, Lockhart moves Harry's sleeve out of the way and cats his spell on Harry's bare arm.

Second, once again, shirts have not been shown to be durable enough to stop spells, however other objects have been shown to stop spells(including the AK), since you are claiming that wearing objects that have been proven to stop spells would render their durability worthless.....you have to provide proof.

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
Well harry was jumping and turning and the broom doesn't have eyes. When they looked away the curse stopped. That's all I got.

Doesn't mean that the spells are autotracking/autohitting in nature. Just that LOS is yet ANOTHER requirement in order to hit a target for some spells.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
So cloth, cloth and leather doesn't stop spells? However:

Golden statue deflects AK spell. Conjured silver shield by Voldy deflects DD's spell.

He's lying, Lockhart didn't cast his spell on Harry's hand, he cast it on Harry's bare arm.

Originally posted by Silent Master
He's lying, Lockhart didn't cast his spell on Harry's hand, he cast it on Harry's bare arm.

Let's not use the word "lie" without proof that he meant to. 😛 "misrecalled" is what happened here, if he's mistaken, I'm sure.