Ultimate Wizard Battle

Originally posted by Robtard
Already shown several times now. Repeat: Gandalf super-heated steel to the point it was glowing in few seconds, a pencil-thin piece of wood will go up like kindling. Even you can't be this dense.

Also:

You silly dodger.

The Balrog died. Gandalf's electrically charged sword hurt it so why wouldn't the killing curse kill something we see killed by someone far less powerful ?

LoL, no. Voldermort's wand will be ash before he realizes it. So back to the "Gandalf never did EXACTS" nonsense. Because Gandalf has fire protection; it was shown in the very first film, you dunce. You've really not seen LoTR. All these arguments-from-ignorance are getting stale.

So more no-limit-fallacy nonsense when it comes to HP spells, especially the Killing Curse. Prove it can affect a supernatural being composed of fire, smoke and shadow or STFU.

Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, no. Voldermort's wand will be ash before he realizes it. So back to the "Gandalf never did EXACTS" nonsense. Because Gandalf has fire protection; it was shown in the very first film, you dunce. You've really not seen LoTR. All these arguments-from-ignorance are getting stale.

So more no-limit-fallacy nonsense when it comes to HP spells, especially the Killing Curse. Prove it can affect a supernatural being composed of fire, smoke and shadow or STFU.

But his wand is just made of wood.......so why wouldn't it burn ?

Killing a balrog isn't a no limits fallacy. The guy who hides in trees even pulled it off while dying himself. Weakling.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, more of that same 'exacts shown' nonsense. As noted, you'd ask for proof that Superman is resistant to Chinese made kitchen knives, cos we've not seen him resist a Chinese made kitchen knife. You're such a poor debater, Quan. Laughably bad.

Gandalf doesn't have a wand, you dunce. Gandalf's fire protective extends outward, like an aura, why his robe and horse weren't burned either, you muppet. "I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor."

No, you're implying the killing curse can kill anything. I have no problem with you claiming that Voldermort could kill the Balrog with Avada Kedavra Curse, JUST PROVE IT OR STFU ALREADY.

Originally posted by Robtard
Yeah, yeah, yeah, more of that same 'exacts shown' nonsense. As noted, you'd ask for proof that Superman is resistant to Chinese made kitchen knives, cos we've not seen him resist a Chinese kitchen knife. You're such a poor debater, Quan. Laughably bad.

Gandalf doesn't have a wand, you dunce. Gandalf's fire protective extends outward, like an aura, why his robe and horse weren't burned either, you muppet. "I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor."

No, you're implying the killing curse can kill anything. I have no problem with you claiming that Voldermort could kill the Balrog with Avada Kedavra Curse, JUST PROVE IT OR STFU ALREADY.

Prove it. It's like saying Thor's clothes are more durable than him since they don't burn up in battle. I am saying it can kill the Balrog. Why wouldn't I believe it could ? It doesn't attack his thick hide for durability purposes so why is he different ?

You go from claiming a far more powerful fire can't hurt him to the killing curse can't either, fanboy. I guess the sun would power him up too, amirite ?

Repeat: Repeat: Repeat: Proof that wand's being a "conduit" means they're indestructible? Cos they've been snapped in twain by children.

Prove that Gandalf has fire-protection? Really? Have to hold you hand again cos you've not seen LoTR. Let's see, Gandalf riding a flaming Balrog and not being burned, nor his robes should be very telling that he's fire-proof, you useless turd. Him surviving a fire-ball along with the horse he was riding is another. I even quoted some hints for you, dummy.

WTF are you ranting about now with this "more powerful fire" nonsense? Anyhow, you claimed Avada Kedavra could kill a supernatural being made of fire, smoke and shadow, so PROVE IT OR STFU.

Originally posted by Robtard
Repeat: Repeat: Repeat: Proof that wand's being a "conduit" means they're indestructible? Cos they've been snapped in twain by children.

Prove that Gandalf has fire-protection? Really? Have to hold you hand again cos you've not seen LoTR. Let's see, Gandalf riding a flaming Balrog and not being burned, nor his robes should be very telling that he's fire-proof, you useless turd. Him surviving a fire-ball along with the horse he was riding is another. I even quoted some hints for you, dummy.

WTF are you ranting about now with this "more powerful fire" nonsense? Anyhow, you claimed Avada Kedavra could kill a supernatural being made of fire, smoke and shadow, so PROVE IT OR STFU.

You claimed fire can destroy pieces of wood but nowhere does it ever show Gandalf is 100 percent immune to fire. My theory that it's not easy to burn magical conduits because of who is wielding them makes sense while you pick and choose when and where to discard logic.

The being has a life and is alive. We see him die. Prove it can't do what it's purpose is. The Balrog is far from unkillable since he died in his one scene.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I have proven they aren't just pieces of wood while being wielded they are magical conduits.

You claimed fire can destroy pieces of wood but nowhere does it ever show Gandalf is 100 percent immune to fire. My theory that it's not easy to burn magical conduits because of who is wielding them makes sense while you pick and choose when and where to discard logic.

The being has a life and is alive. We see him die. Prove it can't do what it's purpose is. The Balrog is far from unkillable since he died in his one scene.

Repeat: Repeat: Repeat: Proof that wands being a "conduit" means they're indestructible? Cos they've been snapped in twain by children.

LoL. Fire can destroy wood, dumbass. LoL. Except for the time when Gandalf was riding a flaming creature and wasn't burned and the time he was completely engulfed in fire and wasn't burned. Prove your "theory" or STFU. You desperately wanting a win doesn't cut it as facts and logic. Sorry.

Yup, more no-limit-fallacy nonsense. That's not proof that Avada Kedavra would work on supernatural beings not composed of flesh. Prove it or STFU.

Quan, Robtard HATES Harry Potter. HATES it. He will argue against it in any and all threads.

Hell, it could be Voldemort versus a blind, deaf and dumb quadrapelegic and he'd argue against Voldemort.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So despite it being the very reason Voldemort sought out another wand and the audience knowing that the connection between Harry and Voldemort was the reason Harry didn't die due to the Avada Kedavra you want to cry foul. Not on quan's watch.

What I presented shows that wands don't automatically become indestructible during duels as you have sneakily tried to allude to throughout this thread.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You lost.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Many have tried to wrestle with the lion on the mountain. Many have fallen. Count yourself among the dead.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You lost. Many have tried to wrestle with the lion on the mountain. Many have fallen. Count yourself among the dead.

Profile'd. The irony behind this makes this hilarious statement makes it even more ridiculous.. 😆

Originally posted by Casper Whitey
Quan, Robtard HATES Harry Potter. HATES it. He will argue against it in any and all threads.

Hell, it could be Voldemort versus a blind, deaf and dumb quadrapelegic and he'd argue against Voldemort.

Derp.

Derpaderp derp. I've said "wizards win" in here before, when it's appropriate. FFS, you're on record for debating that boy wizard Harry Potter defeats Palpatine and Darth Vader.

Why am I not surprised that this thread ultimately becomes another "Gandalf vs Voldemort" debate. No wonder Quan straight-up revived the other thread.

Why the hell does Gandalf burning Voldemort's wand matter? Yes, wands are breakable, but Voldemort has at several times shown that he doesn't need his wand, and sometimes not even spells, to cast his magic. Even if it were wand-on-staff, Voldy would pwn the phuck out of Gandalf. Voldemort was telekinetically manipulating individual shards of glass into a huge flying mass. He'll toss Gandalf's staff out of his hand before Gandalf can even react and then it's AK-time.

What are you basing "Voldermort reacts faster than Gandalf" on?

Gandalf has telekinesis-like powers himself.

Originally posted by Robtard
What are you basing "Voldermort reacts faster than Gandalf" on?

Gandalf has telekinesis-like powers himself.

With his staff. And Voldemort doesn't need his wand. And Voldemort's telekinesis is greater than Gandalf's, as shown with the glass. And yes he does react faster than Gandalf. He would have raped Saruman. Voldemort only needs to distract Gandalf with a Fiendfyre and then cast AK. Hell, he would probably overpower Gandalf and take his staff

Gandalf blasted back hundreds of goblins in the Hobbit. That's a more impressive telekinetic feat than anything Voldemort did IMO. He still loses though.

Originally posted by Robtard
What are you basing "Voldermort reacts faster than Gandalf" on?

Gandalf has telekinesis-like powers himself.

Well, do you agree that Voldemort>>>>Snape?

Originally posted by Robtard

You silly dodger.

If you want to play that game, then Voldemort can't die because he has his horcruxes, making him effectively immortal. Prove Gandalf can affect a vastly-more powerful wizard who is immortal. Gandalf struggled against the Witch-King, and Voldemort would have pwned his ass in a second (as Voldemort is not a man (muggle), but a wizard). If AK can work on the magical beings of the HP verse, then there's no reason to think that it won't work on the magical beings of the LotR-verse.

And matter of fact, the AK isn't limited to magical beings, as shown when Fake-Moody used the unforgivable curses on that spider. So there really is no defense Gandalf has. Voldemort easily overpowers him.

Question: What happened to the rest of the wizards in this matchup?