Maleficent vs Voldemort

Started by quanchi1124 pages

Originally posted by marwash22
are you disputing the idea that a person with a gun could kill a harry potter wizard?
No. I am disputing the notion any slob with a gun kills or defeats any wizard just due to having a gun. At no point did I say or imply wizards are invulnerable to bullets.

but you said the following:

Originally posted by StealthRanger
Humans with guns>wizards

...is based on absolutely nothing show in the films. The implication being that wizards are somehow immune to the effects of bullets due to it not being shown in the films.

Any random person with an automatic weapon and basic understanding of firearms can kill a wizard... pretty sure that's what StealthRanger was getting at.

Originally posted by marwash22
but you said the following:

...is based on absolutely nothing show in the films. The implication being that wizards are somehow immune to the effects of bullets due to it not being shown in the films.

Any random person with an automatic weapon and basic understanding of firearms can kill a wizard... pretty sure that's what StealthRanger was getting at.

He said humans with guns >>>> wizards. Clearly false. He did not specify which gun so he implied any gun beats any wizard. You haveto be clearly skilled to use a gun and aim in the heat of battle.

Humans cannot fly or hurl fireballs either which do far more damage than bullets to a humane body. No, you are clearly wrong and implied something I never stated or alluded to.

pretty sure when he said "gun" he wasn't referring to a goddamn musket.

Originally posted by marwash22
are you disputing the idea that a person with a gun could kill a harry potter wizard?
He was arguing for that point based off a comment from Rowling which has nothing to do with the films. Know the context of the argument.

right; and the idea that her comment, which was made in reference to the books, wouldn't also be true in regards to the films, is nonsensical.

Originally posted by marwash22
right; and the idea that her comment, which was made in reference to the books, wouldn't also be true in regards to the films, is nonsensical.
They are vastly different. If you believe someone of Dumbledore's power and skill goes down to Ralphie from Christmas story then the joke is on you.

Ralphie used a bb gun, so no, he wouldn't beat Dumbledore.

Wyatt Earp, on the other hand, would headshot his old ass.

Originally posted by marwash22
Ralphie used a bb gun, so no, he wouldn't beat Dumbledore.

Wyatt Earp, on the other hand, would headshot his old ass.

So you change the original statement of a human with a gun to certain guns thus completely destroying your point.

Dumbledore would annihilate him.

you know damn well he didn't mean a toy gun wielded by a child. stahp it.

the only thing destroyed here is your credibility as a poster, which in all honesty probably got avada kedavra'd a long time ago.

Originally posted by marwash22
you know damn well he didn't mean a toy gun wielded by a child. stahp it.

the only thing destroyed here is your credibility as a poster, which in all honesty probably got avada kedavra'd a long time ago.

He used the term loosely. We see Dumbledore use pinpoint accuracy while being weakened and hitting zombies underwater in Half Blood Prince yet you claim anyone with a gun beats any wizard as well. You're unreasonable and illogical.

Maleficent wins this, btw.

she can talk faster than Voldy can talk, point his wand and wait for his spell to hit his target.

Originally posted by marwash22
Ralphie used a bb gun, so no, he wouldn't beat Dumbledore.

Times like this, even I'm embarrassed for Quan

Originally posted by marwash22
Maleficent wins this, btw.

she can talk faster than Voldy can talk, point his wand and wait for his spell to hit his target.

Into a dragon takes a lot longer than Crucio. Watch the movie. You're embarrassing yourself.

Originally posted by Robtard
Times like this, even I'm embarrassed for Quan
When I posted evidence you naysayers all tucked tail and ran.

bump

If this is the movie maleficent like the live action one than, Voldemort can produce iron to hurt her as there are chain spells in the HP universe. However Doesn't maleficent at least need to say the words before she does a spell? That makes her open to attack.then she can't turn into a dragon. Both realisticly have the same combative powers with Voldemort edging out in versatility. Also Voldemort doesn't need a wand to cast magic. So really with that I'd have to say Voldemort.

Voldemot.

Originally posted by EmperorSidious2
If this is the movie maleficent like the live action one than, Voldemort can produce iron to hurt her as there are chain spells in the HP universe. However Doesn't maleficent at least need to say the words before she does a spell? That makes her open to attack.then she can't turn into a dragon. Both realisticly have the same combative powers with Voldemort edging out in versatility. Also Voldemort doesn't need a wand to cast magic. So really with that I'd have to say Voldemort.

Voldemot.

Quit riding my coattails.

You're an actual a$$hole

Originally posted by maxivitopowe
You're an actual a$$hole
Go easy on emperor Sidious I think he's a kid.