"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.
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.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
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.
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
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Last edited by Silent Master on Dec 2nd, 2012 at 02:58 AM
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.
Gender: Male Location: Stuck In the future where Akus evil
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.
snape performed a counter curse on harry's broom in the first movie without a wand. The two faced squirrel was able to perform a curse without a wand in that same scene.
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?
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?
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
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).
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.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
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.
He's lying, Lockhart didn't cast his spell on Harry's hand, he cast it on Harry's bare arm.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
KMC Community Forums
Dec 2nd, 2012 02:48 AM
"misrecalled" is what happened here, if he's mistaken, I'm sure.
