If you're not even familiar with the basics of Harry Potter, then you have no place arguing against it. You need to be more neutral until you're not ignorant.
Not incorrect. It's been addressed multiple times be me over the last 2 years.
You ignoring it doesn't make it go away. You obviously don't know jack because no "game" was played by me on this particular point: only you raging.
That's another strawman.
I never said, "Gandalf can only destroy a stave because that's all he's done." That's not even contextually correct.
And your proof contradicts your previous strawman. And that quote barely covers the entirety of my argument. It's just anothe strawman on your part because I've clearly expanded, greatly, upon that very concept.
If the best you can do to argue is use snippits of other poster's quotes...
Incorrect, but it is for you. You want to apply a very specific kind of staff busting to any and all objects. Since I've pointed out how stupid that is, it's just a childish attempt on your part. You don't even know the basic spells of HP dueling, so it's no wonder you'd resort to lame arguments: it's all you've got.
You should probably sit this one out and let the nerds discuss this.
"This is a a logical fallacy on your part.
You first have to properly represent my argument with another question before you can start "explaining" why my perspective is wrong.
Until you stop using a lame strawman, there's no point in entertaining these lines of questioning."
Ah, cool, you're just playing games and trolling. Got it. Make claims; don't back them up. Say something; then say you didn't say it despite it being quoted. Counter accuse and dodge. All good. Touche'.
Harry Potter sucking at occlumency has nothing to do with Gandalf having 0 defense against getting his mind read.
Gandalf does not posses knowledge of both the magical spell required, and the technique employed to protect himself. It takes practice.
This line of discussion will not be entertained, further: it's quite absurd that you even tried to defend Gandalf against something he literally has no defense against.
It wasn't a combat situation...yet...it was. Dancing around points that have destroyed yours doesn't make it go away.
And, again, this:
"No avada kedavra incanted there against Dumbledore, either, BTW.
So that's 0 for 2 on your ploy about death spells."
So it would appear, thus far, that you are doing nothing, at all, to counter what I brought up. Only ignoring or dancing around points. This is to be expected because you literally could not come up with a counter with those points.
About the reaction: if you choose to say that Voldemort didn't react very fast, then you only hurt your position because Gandalf's reaction to the fireball was slower.
1. Not an Avada Kedavra.
2. You actually did not ADDRESSS A SINGLE THING IN WHAT YOU QUOTED.
This applies, yet again:
"So it would appear, thus far, that you are doing nothing, at all, to counter what I brought up. Only ignoring or dancing around points. This is to be expected because you literally could not come up with a counter with those points."
No, this:
"He also uses a massive amount of what I would like to call "shadow TK" to bust up the entire room...withOUT using his wand at around 1:40."
He already showed using TK without his wand. There's no reason to invoke wand use when he doesn't point his wand.
Is he just supposed to set his wand down while using his TK?
You do know that a Deatheater was seen slowing down the train with his non-wand hand, right?
But, you can go ahead and gimp one side to make you feel better: that will still not result in a victory, by any stretch of the imagination.
It doesn't matter because there's nothing you can deny that will make Voldemort start using his wand when he didn't: deny all you want. The feat stands whether your rage about it or not.
This:
No, this:
"He also uses a massive amount of what I would like to call "shadow TK" to bust up the entire room...withOUT using his wand at around 1:40."
He already showed using TK without his wand. There's no reason to invoke wand use when he doesn't point his wand.
Is he just supposed to set his wand down while using his TK?
You do know that a Deatheater was seen slowing down the train with his non-wand hand, right?
But, you can go ahead and gimp one side to make you feel better: that will still not result in a victory, by any stretch of the imagination.
It doesn't matter because there's nothing you can deny that will make Voldemort start using his wand when he didn't: deny all you want. The feat stands whether your rage about it or not."
But, also, not one single person. In fact, not 20 skilled Jedi could replicate that glass feat Voldemort did.
It's thousands of tiny shards of glass being entirely controlled at once. The closest we come to that is Yoda creating a suspension wall to catch falling rocks from Dooku. It doesn't even come close in terms of size of the TK and the complexity involved.
It would certainly help if you actually replied to the points presented.
That quote had absolutely nothing to do with what I presented.
Try again.
But, if you want me to argue against points I didn't argue against, Harry Potter DID resist the TK bow as he's straining under the force. If he didn't resist, he would fall over.
You're trolling, right?
Please tell me you're trolling (you are) because no one is actually that big of an idiot.
You can pretend it wasn't an combat situation and that Voldemort opened with the death spell, but none of that is actually true.
Stop ignoring what was seen on screen.
If Harry Potter wasn't fighting, then why did he cast a spell at Voldemort (you know...the one where Robtard doesn't know what it is)
Technically, Voldemort opened with a forced TK bow. He then cast Crucio.
He didn't use Avada Kedavra until well after their fight began.
That wasn't even a nice try on your part: just more lying and misrepresentation.
You're still 0/3 and no lying will change that on your part.
Irrelevant to what I actually stated. You do this a lot.
You mean the same feat that had both a longer travel time and distance to travel when Gandalf was ready for it (but Voldemort was not ready for Harry Potter to fight back).
Again, nice try, but you're lying is becoming tiresome.
Thanks for proving my point that Gandalf was ready for it and Voldemort has faster reflexes.
Epic battles?
Obviously, that's quite subjective.
And, by screen feats, Gandalf is slower.
A smile is not a laugh.
You didn't do anything to counter what I stated.
Here's what your posting style comprises of:
1. Making fun of the other side with snide comments and belittliing.
2. Lying about screen feats.
3. Ignoring what other's points were.
4. Denying what was clearly seen on screen.
5. Making irrelevant points and counters.
You are a very bad debator. Most of your posts are just simply wrong or irrelevant to the points brought up.
What's worse, you completely ignored that last point I made.
Edit - I would like to say that outside of this dicussion, you're one of my new favorite posters. Don't take my crotchy attitude as anything personal.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Oct 19th, 2011 at 11:16 PM
This will be hurried because I have to go back to studying
That doesn't change anything. What literally occurred is Gandalf breaking Saruman's staff, but that in itself is symbolic of Gandalf casting Saruman out of the Istari.
Gimli threw an axe at him- Gandalf clearly invoked magic when he swung his staff at the projectile and shattered an axe with a staff. That just doesn't happen normally...
He completely brushed off:
"Darkness took me......and I strayed out of thought and time. Stars wheeled overhead......and every day was as long as a life age of the Earth. But it was not the end. I felt life in me again. I've been sent back...... until my task is done."
&
"I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the Flame of Anor."
Gandalf was 'killed' but "sent back" by godly powers aka Valar to complete his task of defeating Sauron, "the Dark Lord." Basically, godly powers (Valar) sent Gandalf as their agent to fight the Dark Lord. Ergo, he (especially now as the White Wizard) is depicted as some sort of angel, since angels are the agents of God.
Hence he is divine, and the second quote, along with the rest I've provided earlier, support that obvious statement.
Actually, provide me one quote from the movie where someone says "Avada Kedavra can't be blocked."
All the instances of Avada Kedavra I'm pointing out are in places where the spellcaster is clearly trying to kill the other individual. That is also consistent with the color scheme of the Killing Curse.
Basically, you're still denial.
__________________
BlackZero30x created this a-'Maize'-ing signature! =)
They were backed up in the very same vid we are discussing. You refusing to watch it or even familiarize yourself with the other side speaks to your interests in this discussion: I'll let you fill in what you're doing.
It's odd that Korto Vos knows exactly what I'm talking about and he's going out of his way to ignore what was seen on screen.
So what's your excuse?
If only that were something I said.
Keep in mind, that your posting style in discussions relies almost entirely and strawman arguments:
"I never said, "Gandalf can only destroy a stave because that's all he's done." That's not even contextually correct.
And your proof contradicts your previous strawman. And that quote barely covers the entirety of my argument. It's just another strawman on your part because I've clearly expanded, greatly, upon that very concept."
Yes, it is all good. I wore a condo, so you won't get AIDS this time.
You're saying that because Gandalf doesn't know Occlumency, he will lose to Voldemort because the Dark Wizard can use Legilimency to win.
Yet, Harry Potter, who is depicted at failing Occlumency, holds his own against one of the best Legilimency practitioners of all time. The is only possible because of his sheer willpower.
And Gandalf is bursting with willpower.
Sure, this line of discussion doesn't need to be entertained because it plays no factor in this duel, as it short as it will be.
Voldemort disarming Harry is a "combat situation"?! -.- WTF?
Considering Voldemort's favoritism to the Killing Curse, the spell's semblance to the physical nature of Avada Kedavra, and Voldemort's opponent (Dumbledore), yes, as a matter, it is Avada Kedavra.
If you insist.
Except, you see, it doesn't.
Watch that clip again. Even for as easy as it was for Voldy, he still had to snarl and throw down his arm with pace, both of which indicate some exertion. But uhh...Gandalf just stood still and emerged from the smoke completely unfazed and unimpressed.
1. Yes, an Avada Kedavra.
Sweet boss, whatever you wanna say!
Are you a pro at dodgeball? Because I see a rather impressive evasion of all my earlier points here.
Once again, wizards are limited to basic spells without their wands. But, in all of the instances you have provided, the spellcasters still hold their wands and therefore are still drawing upon the instrument's magic conduit to produce those actions.
You were touting the TK blow there, and I was countering how it was extremely unimpressive.
And oh yeah, not a combat situation.
Completely wrong.
This is just sad because even Voldemort in the film is trying to get Potter to stand up to him like a man and engage him in a proper 1v1 wizarding duel, where two combatants who are ready stand and face each other a slight distance apart. And that occurs at 3:10 in the video.
Seems all you like to do is call anyone who disagrees with you a "liar." Pathetic.
Another wrong statement. You do this a lot.
Gandalf's pyrokinesis was instant and spontaneous and required no movement from his staff, unlike Saruman's.
Saruman's spell was a fireball. Gandalf's ability is instant pyrokinesis. Learn the difference.
This is probably the dumbest thing you've said.
True, it is subjective.
Though battles in the Chamber of Mazarbul, against Balrog, and at Helms Deep, Pelennor Fields, and Morannon were quite large-scale, eye-popping, and thoroughly impressive :P
He reacted quite quickly against Aragorn and company in the Fangorn Forest.
My bad!
You started this. And you do it to a greater degree than me.
Gimme a break. GTFO if you can't handle people disagreeing with you.
I addressed all your points. You are too busy are either ignoring them yourself or just simply calling them "lies."
No...I don't do that.
Sure, if you insist. I find it rather shallow and classless of you to say that. If you can't handle disagreement, stop calling posts as "lies" and don't debate.
I won't!
__________________
BlackZero30x created this a-'Maize'-ing signature! =)
It was not just symbolic, as I explained previously.
Well since that Blinding Light you harp on was blocking the way we do not actually see what Gandalf does very clearly. He could of just of shattered the wooden handle.
No, he addressed them. He just interpreted them in a different light than you did.
Incorrect. You are assigning christian meaning upon a work of fiction, assuming that they function the same way. That Gandalf was ressurrected by a higher power does not make him a demi-god in any way.
As an aside, what are you trying to accomplish by saying that Gandalf is a demi-god? Are you suggesting that therefore he would be immune to the death spell? Because that is.... complete bullshit.
No, he is a puppet of a divine force. That is not the same as being divine in and of itself.
Seriously? The death spells unblockability is its main feature. You're own wiki page points that out in the very sentence you yourself posted.
They're clearly trying to kill their opponent..... so they must be using the killing curse? Lol, what?
Well I'm.... denying you, yes. Because you're wrong.
Gandalf's a Maiar, but Avada Kedavra is blockable? Neither are explicitly stated, but are canonical fact in the relative universes. Blatantly discarding something "cuz the movies don't say so in a clear manner" is f*cking retarded.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
Voldemort wins because he is faster, more powerful, and goes for the kill immediately unlike Gandalf.
What ? Aragorn didn't cheapshot anyone. he came out of nowhere to take them all on at once. The funniest part is one man fights them all off at once with a sword and a torch. Voldemort would kill him in an instant let alone if he had 7 deatheaters with him. This Witch King alone defeated Gandalf while Aragorn defeated all of the Nazgul with just a torch and a sword.
Also the Avada Kedavra is always spoken in the movies when it's used. Every single time. Korto is just making things up again saying otherwise and there's no proof to his unsupported claims just like his demi god or maiar rants.
Voldemort doesn't even need to kill him to take him out. Immobulus is a fast-moving pulsating wave that would freeze him place. The Full Body Bind doesn't have a beam or blast that can be "blocked" by anything Gandalf possesses. Not even his uber powerful super sword that can block a Killing Curse "for some reason". Even if Gandalf managed to intercept a Killing Curse with Galmdring, it's going to be destroyed in the process. A second later, he's defenseless and has been hit by another spell--probably another Killing Curse.
There is literally no way for Gandalf, or anyone on the LotR movies to defeat Voldemort (or most competent HP wizards) without severely handicapping the wizard first.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
Gandalf doesn't have his staff when he leaves Isengard; his staff is still in Saruman's possession...
Here is an image of Gimli's throwing axe:
(please log in to view the image)
As you can see, it's not at all just a piece of wood with an iron head. The haft is reinforced with metal and appears very sturdy.
Even physically shattering a strong wooden handle with a staff is impressive, but against that type of material? It seems evident to me that magic came into play there.
Tolkien was Christian. And interestingly, on the Wikipedia page for Gandalf, under Concept and Creation, it states:
Gandalf's role and importance was substantially increased in the conception of The Lord of the Rings, and in a letter of 1954, Tolkien refers to Gandalf as an "angel incarnate".[12] In the same letter Tolkien states he was given the form of an old man in order to limit his powers on Earth. Both in 1965 and 1971 Tolkien again refers to Gandalf as an angelic being.[13][14]
I tried clicking on the citations, but they lead to unlinkable Letters.
Nevertheless, I searched on the web, and found multiple sites having Tolkien say, "I venture to say that he [Gandalf] was an angel incarnate."
No...the whole Voldemort is automatically more powerful than Gandalf (even though this thread's purpose is to determine that) and therefore Gandalf can't shatter his wand argument.
If that's really to be used as an actual defense, I'll counter with "Gandalf is a divine, angelic figure who is above mankind, and therefore is automatically more powerful than Voldy (a mere human being), and hence can break his stick. "
Must be some divine, powerful puppet if the godly forces are trusting him to fight against the "Dark Lord."
I am dead serious. The Wiki pages rely on the book and other written source material.
However, what I pulled out was a Behind the Scenes comment on how the Killing Curse was blocked in the films. And sure enough, you have clips of Bellatrix and Harry blocking spells that are jets of greenish-blue light from two murder-enraged individuals (Molly and Voldemort), which led to that obvious conclusion on the Wiki page.
Ergo, since this the MVF, find me something from the films that states Avada Kedavra is unblockable.
You're forgetting that their spells also physically resemble Avada Kedavra.
Slowly, you will realize I have been correct all along
__________________
BlackZero30x created this a-'Maize'-ing signature! =)
KMC Community Forums
Oct 19th, 2011 10:28 PM
I won't!
