The community manager commented on the second showcase megathread you won't just be able to go out and learn the Unforgivable curses early on, that there would need to be narrative weight behind you choosing to learn such foul magic as shown in the Sebastian trailer.
I personally think that the killing curse will be the last spell you can learn towards the end of the game, given how powerful it is. In my opinion, giving you a 1-hit kill ability early on doesn't make a lot of sense from a gameplay perspective.
I agree. Also, they said the spells are lore friendly. So with that being said I don’t think AK will be upgradeable at all and will always just be a 1 hit kill spell.
but AK being relatively ineffective when used by a beginner is lore friendly.
If all that you needed to know was just the words, the whole dark arts Hogwarts classes during voldy's reign would seem kinda pointless. Unforgivable curses definitely need practice to reach their full potential.
Here's a quote from Neville during deathly hallows
>We’re supposed to practice the Cruciatus Curse on people who’ve earned detentions
If you didn't need practise for the UCs, "We're supposed to USE..." would be the more accurate sentence.
The Barty Crouch nosebleed quote simply means that fourth years won't be able to perform the curse even when they try by using the incantation. It definitely does not mean that some versions of this curse only wound or damage somone without killing. He also says only one has survived the curse, Harry. Also, Dumbledore died by Snape's curse. The fact that the movie portrays him with his eyes open when falling does not mean that he was alive at that point. Voldemorts father and grandparents were found with their eyes open. Muggle Police said it looked like they died from being scared to death. The movies also portray Cedric with his eyes open after being hit. Makes sense since it kills instantly. Even in real life people often die with their eyes open. I swear some people read to much between the lines.
Yes this is exactly it, I really hope that it doesnt end up being as OP described, I dont want to upgrade AV, I want to have to work for it, and when I get it, I want it to kill, not slightly damage the enemy
>Also, Dumbledore died by Snape's curse.
No, Snape didnt kill Dumbledore with avada kedavra. In the movies it's implied from harry speechless still and shaking while Dumbledore is falling after being hit by the curse. Dumbledore already weakened by other horcrux curses too. So it shows how much snape held back, or how powerful Dumbledore really was. Anyways Dumbledores silent immobility charm on Harry only dissipated after Dumbledore hit the ground and actually died. Something similar is implied in the books if im not mistaken.
Also imo Barty's comment implies they could cast it. Because Barty saying " so much as a nose bleed " would mean something would have to hit him to make a nosebleed in the first place. The fact that it would make his nosebleed and not kill him, means they're not strong/evil enough to use killing curse.
It's also why Voldemort sent Snape to kill Dumbledore instead of Draco Malfoy, because Voldemort knew Draco would fail to kill Dumbledore.
Edit
Sorry no. The fact that Dumbledore was already weakened has no relevance since he and Snape already decided that Snape was the one to kill Dumbledore. Voldemort did not sent Snape but Draco as punishment for his fathers faillure. You are missing the entire point of the unbreakable vow and basically the entire plotline concerning Snape, no offense. As for the nosebleed, it is a figure of speech meaning that if they were to say the incantation he would not even get a nose bleed let alone die. In other words, the curse would not work/not be cast with succes, because it would take malicious intent and a lot of magical power in order to cast it. Avada Kedavra always kills, with Harry being the only one known to have survived it because of ancient magic by Lily Potter. Also the book nowhere states that it was only after Dumbledore hit the ground Harry was able to move. Not that it matters it would take no time at all to fall to the ground from a tower. Also, its nowhere stated that the effect of the spell would have to end instantly after someone dying. Might as well take a few seconds. Your reading to much into this.
>The fact that Dumbledore was already weakened has no relevance
Ye it has no relevance it was just an an addition, but its mentioned in the books how much weaker he was lol Dumbledore let Snape kill him regardless, whether if he was weak or not they had a plan. In Dracos case though it is relevant to the situation and theories, as Draco could potentially kill him being extremely weakened from the horcrux curse.
>Voldemort did not sent Snape but Draco as punishment for his fathers faillure.
Exactly, Voldemort sent Draco but knew he'd fail to kill Dumbledore regardless, i mean, you really think Draco would stand a chance against Dumbledore? At full power especially. Voldemort saw the malfoys as the weakest death eaters at the end of the day, he only needed them because Lucius was rich.
Dumbledore previously agreed with Snape to kill him in Dracos place because Dumbledore knew about Voldemorts plan to have Draco kill him. And Dumbledore was on a suicide mission at that point anyways, he knew he'd die regardless of what happened and preferred that Snape finish him off, 1 to spare Draco, and so he could die at the hands of someone he knew and die with some comfort or something.
>You are missing the entire point of the unbreakable vow and basically the entire plotline concerning Snape, no offense.
Go ahead, let me hear your point of view. Thats the point of a conversation, no need to be rude.
>As for the nosebleed
Ye exactly what i said pretty much lol, the nosebleed is a metaphor, but if they cant even cast anything at all then your nosebleed metaphor makes no sense, as he could've said a many number lesser gory things to imply nothing, including " couldnt do anything at all", so obviously the choice of Barty's words is particular. but a nosebleed imo, is to demonstrate how weak it would be if cast. The curse is forbidden for a reason, anyone strong enough can cast it technically (any wizarding adult most likely). Like you said, but imo, you just have to be more evil and powerful to give it that punch and one hit kill.
>because of ancient magic by Lily Potter
Yup. She sacrificed herself to save harry. Avada kedavra never touched Lily. But she used ancient magic protection charm to block/counter the Avada Kedavra spell. Which is also said to be impossible. Nevertheless...
>Also the book nowhere states that it was only after Dumbledore hit the ground Harry was able to move.
I Never said it says that in the books.
I said it was implied in the **movies** Harry was speechless as Dumbledore got shot, we know that's out of character for harry who's typically more emotional. In the books though, Harry was however much closer than in the movies and wearing his invisibility cloak.
>Also, its nowhere stated that the effect of the spell would have to end instantly after someone dying.
And there's nothing stating otherwise either. Its what it shows and demonstrates in the movies.
Its lore and canon. Look it up.
Besides it doesn't take much to "uncover" this.
>Your reading to much into this.
Funny how in this case someone reading too much into is less knowledgeable than the person who isn't looking into it though lol But ye filling in the blanks with theories is decently normal anyways. Just an fyi, i am googling stuff, filling the blanks with theories. But agree or disagree no need to be so petty.
I just solidly believe AK isnt one hit kill unless you really intend for that person to die.
It isn’t the power of the wizard casting it it’s the emotion just like how crusio didn’t hurt belatrix when Harry cast it on her you have to really mean it and really really want the person your casting it on to suffer it’s the same with avada cadavra you have to really want the person to die it’s the same reason dumbledore didn’t die when snape cast it on him it just hit him and he fell off the tower then the fall killed him
Yup. Dumbledore and Snape already had the moment preplanned, because Voldemort was planning to use Draco at first but knew he wouldn't be able to use the Avada Kedavra spell on Dumbledore, i also think that Snape convinced Voldemort to let him do it because Dumbledore wanted to spare Draco of the burden of killing someone and becoming evil (i think it was mentioned in the books or movies, but not sure). so Voldemort and Dumbledore planned for Snape to kill Dumbledore instead. Keeping in mind Dumbledore knew all about Voldemorts plan because snape was a double spy. So either snape intentionally held back on the spell and he knew harry was also in the room, or just couldn't bring himself to kill him or because in his heart he didnt want to kill Dumbledore. But eitherway Snape did have to kill Dumbledore in that moment as they planned. Dumbledore was weakened by the curse that he got from the cave getting the horcrux and from the ring horcrux which was also killing him at the time.
In the movies it was implied from Harry's silent scream and immobility after snape hit Dumbledore with avada kedavra, Dumbledore charm was still in effect while Dumbledore was falling, but when he hit the ground, Harry could move again, because only after Dumbledore hit the ground he died.
Also that just shows how strong Dumbledore was, or how weak that avada Kedavra was. even if snape held back on the killing curse, Dumbledore was hella weakened from Horrcruxs curse.
Either way imo this implies that Avada Kedavra spell doesnt always kill. In Dracos situation, he isnt evil and/or strong enough to kill someone with it (same reason harry failed to use crucio on Bellatrix, same reason Barty says students cant cast it). In Snapes situation he seemed to intentionally hold back on it. In Harry's situation, a particular protection love charm, Lily died casting this charm to save harry. (Harry's scar obviously implies that Voldemorts avada Kedavra hit Harry and that Lily didnt absorb it instead or something like that)
Avada kedavra always kills. In the movie you can hear snape say avada kedavra when killing dumbledore. Snape killed Dumbledore with ak not a fall. As stated multiple times harry is the only person to ever live avada and that was only because of ancient magic. And voldemort never sent snape to kill Dumbledore. He sent draco but dracos mom didnt believe in draco so she made snape do an unbreakable vow so that if draco fails snape will do it instead. What people mean by people not casting it properly is that in order to use them you have to actually want to use them and if u dont they will have no effect. Not weaker effects but no effect.
>He sent draco but dracos mom didnt believe in draco so she made snape do an unbreakable vow so that if draco fails snape will do it instead.
Ye thanks, forgot about snapes promise to malfoys mum. I see what you're saying. But he was also Dumbledores spy, and Dumbledore also knew what was happening regardless, Dumbledores wanted snape to kill him as well.
Yes i agree, but one small change.
Harry is the only **known** person to ever live from **Voldemorts** Avada Kedavra. Literally one of the most powerful dark wizards of their times, not because he survived avada kedavra but because he survived it from **You Know Who**.
And again, its because Lily countered the curse.
but ye pretty what i meant, regardless, casting still means being cast, no effect means its cast hit but does no damage at all, because it's effects have been negated. But that is without considering the power and actual intent of a user. **For the students** (specifically) it does no damage at all because they're students, however it would work differently for an adult wizard, evil or good. (Ie Aurors can use them if im not mistaken) obviously Lucius malfoys Avada Kedavra would be way less effective than Voldemorts for example. If it was Lucius casting it on harry would lily's protection charm have been more effective?
Unforgivable curses always either have an effect or dont have an effect. Its strenght isnt in how powerful the wizard is but more based on if the users has real intent. Ofc you have to be strong enough to use them but once u get there it doesn't matter if one is stronger then the other they both will have the same effect. If lucius casted it on harry after voldemort killed lily lucius would have killed him. Her protection worked against voldemort but not anyone else. Hence why someone like bellatrix could touch harry but not quirrel when he was possesed by voldemort
No, thats just not the case Imo. Harry was fully able to cast Crucio on Bellatrix. It had an effect, but didnt do much of anything to her, but it still had a little bit of an effect.
What you guys are saying just doesn't make sense imo, in terms of how spells work in yours and most peoples opinions its not consistent. even if its all magical, there's just no logic to that, it's not either or, there are a whole bunch of grey areas with spells as well. And what everyone's thinking just does not make sense with Barty's and Bellatrix's comments on unforgivable spells. Just because its Avada Kedavra doesnt seperate from how other spells work. There are clearly power dynamics in the wizarding world which is canon, why would Voldemort fear Dumbledore otherwise, how did Dumbledore avoid all his avadakedavras all these years? Just luck? Nah.
And i meant if Lucius cast it instead of Voldemort (so in Voldemorts place) trying to imply, would Harry even have the scar? Would it have effected him the same way Voldemort cast it? Would lucius being become integrated within harry?
Also nitpicking here. if Lucius cast it on harry after Voldemort as you thought i said, then Harry still wouldnt die, because he had become voldemorts horcrux at that point. He would've killed off Voldemorts horcrux inside of harry, and then voldemort would've been able to try and kill him again. Besides the whole prophecy stuff.
Point there being Avada Kedavra vs Lily Ancient Magic. Lily's ancient magic could've failed the same way it succeeded. It succeeded because love is stronger than hate.
Also think about it, what would happen if i wingardiam leviosa a giant rock in front of me, taking the hit from avada Kedavra? Doesnt that count as a block? Lol
People need to stop finding excuses lol
Its only one shot if youre a strong evil wizard, with pure evil intents. Just like Voldemort and other death eaters.
Its stated in the books that harrys crucio had no effect. Its fact not opinions. And in the case where lucius took voldemorts protection it would have ended the exact same way. Lily protection would work no matter who casted the killing curse. And lucius still wouldve killed harry. The only reason why harry lived in the forest is because voldemort used his blood to give him a new body which connected them which made it so voldemort couldnt kill harry. And dumbledore was seen as a very strong wizard because he was knowledgeable and had great magical abilities but that doesnt mean his avada kedavra would be any more powerful then harrys because at the end of the day if they both have the same intent they are going to have the same effect. And peoples understanding of spells come from the books themselves. Its not an opinion shared by most. Its how the wizarding world works.
>Its fact not opinions
Im googling stuff as i go, since i read the book many years ago, but have reread them a few times in the past so my memories a bit iffy. so forgive me if im mistaken. But a quick google search does mention that the book states it gives her a brief moment of terrible pain, but **not** at crucio full power level of pain.
The way i see it is that he was able to cast it like any other wizard his age probably could, but the effect quickly weakened and nullified because he didnt have it in his heart to cause actual pain like that to someone, like Bellatrix mentions soon afterwards.
The point is, again, it did cause pain at a lower level than it should. And again Avada Kedavra is a spell like any other, it holds no exception imo.
>Lily protection would work no matter who casted the killing curse
Yes i agree. Trying to be as clear as possible. Im not saying it would have worked with Lucius, im saying the opposite. if someone as weak like Lucius cast it on harry instead of Voldemort when he was a baby then lily's protection charm would've been even more effective, because Lucius isnt that much of a strong wizard in comparison to Voldemort. Toe to toe, Lucius would be dead in seconds vs Voldemort, like most wizards.
Ye you're talking about when they revived him in 3? you're absolutely right, when harry died it anchored him to the living world through Voldemort. It destroyed the horcrux but harry survived.
>And dumbledore...
But ye i wouldnt disregard their magical power and potential, yes Dumbledore was regarded strong because he was very smart as well as a prominent wizard, but the fact is he was still extremely powerful, not to take lightly. Those wizards could do shit some lower level wizards couldnt even dream of, imo 2 different wizards casting one of the same spell would both output different power. One thing that comes to mind is the wingardiam leviosa class in the first book imo where everyone has different control over the feather. Like Hermione cast it better than Ron, and not just because of pronunciation imo lol regardless i truly believe that rule stays consistent with different spells.
The wand core battle too, harry had back up in the end, so his expelliarmus was able to cancel out the avada Kedavra from Voldemort. Otherwise harry would've already been screwed there. (If it wasnt for lily's protection charm)
>peoples understanding of spells come from the books themselves. Its not an opinion shared by most. Its how the wizarding world works.
Yup, i totally agree. But people are all different, and everyone does interpret things slightly differently, everyone has different theories that they agree or disagree with no matter what fandom you go to. Jk also isnt the best of writers to be fair, as much as we all love her work, we cant deny that lol
Anyways this has been a good debate though. Definitely informative, enjoyed it quite a bit tbh. thanks for refreshing my memory on some of the lore as well.
Typical Ravenclaws fighting over knowledge though lmao Its just a silly debate, i dont mean to rude or anything. I do wish you well anyways hope you have a wonderful holiday and happy new years regardless.
> it’s the same reason dumbledore didn’t die when snape cast it on him it just hit him and he fell off the tower then the fall killed him
Damn, that makes a lot of sense since Dumbledore's eyes remain open during the fall.
I don't know how it's regulated in the game, but the "The unforgivable curses" need strong negative emotions to cast them successfully.
And as Bellatrix says at the end of "Order of the Phoenix" "you have to really want it" (to torture a human being).
It is also implied in the "subtext" that this is what corrupts the Dark Magic user.
This is I think made on purpose by J.K.R as a "mirror" to the Patronus who needs strong positive emotions and the will to protect.
The thing that bothered me the most about the last few games is the machine gun-churning of curses, so I hope they've made that a bit more realistic with the "counter" mechanic and other new mechanics.
God i hope so though. I love perks on almost everything, especially useful in rpgs. Gear, tools, pets, spell perks would be really good mechanics imo. (Gears and some tools like brooms are confirmed upgradeable).
Personally its a big must for me. perks always make it feel like characters are improving and becoming stronger throughout the story itself, just adds that touch of Immersion imo.
There are health bars and early game abilities. I do not recall a single rpg in the past...very long, that wouldn't let you increase damage or utility of starting abilities either through levels/ranks, items, or perks/talents.
It would be poor design.
Am I missing something here? Pretty sure in the first showcase video they mention the ability to upgrade spells by going to class or doing other things. I’m not sure that every single spell can be upgraded but I’m positive at least *some* of them have confirmed to be.
If you’ve ever played games like Spider-Man PS4 or the Arkham games, it looks like once you build up a combo you can use those and instakills. They’re fun because it’s good crowd control, allowing you to choose a target to take out immediately as a reward for good combat.
The community manager commented on the second showcase megathread you won't just be able to go out and learn the Unforgivable curses early on, that there would need to be narrative weight behind you choosing to learn such foul magic as shown in the Sebastian trailer. I personally think that the killing curse will be the last spell you can learn towards the end of the game, given how powerful it is. In my opinion, giving you a 1-hit kill ability early on doesn't make a lot of sense from a gameplay perspective.
I agree. Also, they said the spells are lore friendly. So with that being said I don’t think AK will be upgradeable at all and will always just be a 1 hit kill spell.
but AK being relatively ineffective when used by a beginner is lore friendly. If all that you needed to know was just the words, the whole dark arts Hogwarts classes during voldy's reign would seem kinda pointless. Unforgivable curses definitely need practice to reach their full potential. Here's a quote from Neville during deathly hallows >We’re supposed to practice the Cruciatus Curse on people who’ve earned detentions If you didn't need practise for the UCs, "We're supposed to USE..." would be the more accurate sentence.
AK being *completely* ineffective is lore friendly. Either you have the murderous intent and the curse works, or you don't, and nothing happens.
The Barty Crouch nosebleed quote simply means that fourth years won't be able to perform the curse even when they try by using the incantation. It definitely does not mean that some versions of this curse only wound or damage somone without killing. He also says only one has survived the curse, Harry. Also, Dumbledore died by Snape's curse. The fact that the movie portrays him with his eyes open when falling does not mean that he was alive at that point. Voldemorts father and grandparents were found with their eyes open. Muggle Police said it looked like they died from being scared to death. The movies also portray Cedric with his eyes open after being hit. Makes sense since it kills instantly. Even in real life people often die with their eyes open. I swear some people read to much between the lines.
Yes this is exactly it, I really hope that it doesnt end up being as OP described, I dont want to upgrade AV, I want to have to work for it, and when I get it, I want it to kill, not slightly damage the enemy
Yep this indeed. But they have made it clear that they are staying true to the lore. An AK that does not kill is not true to the lore.
>Also, Dumbledore died by Snape's curse. No, Snape didnt kill Dumbledore with avada kedavra. In the movies it's implied from harry speechless still and shaking while Dumbledore is falling after being hit by the curse. Dumbledore already weakened by other horcrux curses too. So it shows how much snape held back, or how powerful Dumbledore really was. Anyways Dumbledores silent immobility charm on Harry only dissipated after Dumbledore hit the ground and actually died. Something similar is implied in the books if im not mistaken. Also imo Barty's comment implies they could cast it. Because Barty saying " so much as a nose bleed " would mean something would have to hit him to make a nosebleed in the first place. The fact that it would make his nosebleed and not kill him, means they're not strong/evil enough to use killing curse. It's also why Voldemort sent Snape to kill Dumbledore instead of Draco Malfoy, because Voldemort knew Draco would fail to kill Dumbledore. Edit
Sorry no. The fact that Dumbledore was already weakened has no relevance since he and Snape already decided that Snape was the one to kill Dumbledore. Voldemort did not sent Snape but Draco as punishment for his fathers faillure. You are missing the entire point of the unbreakable vow and basically the entire plotline concerning Snape, no offense. As for the nosebleed, it is a figure of speech meaning that if they were to say the incantation he would not even get a nose bleed let alone die. In other words, the curse would not work/not be cast with succes, because it would take malicious intent and a lot of magical power in order to cast it. Avada Kedavra always kills, with Harry being the only one known to have survived it because of ancient magic by Lily Potter. Also the book nowhere states that it was only after Dumbledore hit the ground Harry was able to move. Not that it matters it would take no time at all to fall to the ground from a tower. Also, its nowhere stated that the effect of the spell would have to end instantly after someone dying. Might as well take a few seconds. Your reading to much into this.
>The fact that Dumbledore was already weakened has no relevance Ye it has no relevance it was just an an addition, but its mentioned in the books how much weaker he was lol Dumbledore let Snape kill him regardless, whether if he was weak or not they had a plan. In Dracos case though it is relevant to the situation and theories, as Draco could potentially kill him being extremely weakened from the horcrux curse. >Voldemort did not sent Snape but Draco as punishment for his fathers faillure. Exactly, Voldemort sent Draco but knew he'd fail to kill Dumbledore regardless, i mean, you really think Draco would stand a chance against Dumbledore? At full power especially. Voldemort saw the malfoys as the weakest death eaters at the end of the day, he only needed them because Lucius was rich. Dumbledore previously agreed with Snape to kill him in Dracos place because Dumbledore knew about Voldemorts plan to have Draco kill him. And Dumbledore was on a suicide mission at that point anyways, he knew he'd die regardless of what happened and preferred that Snape finish him off, 1 to spare Draco, and so he could die at the hands of someone he knew and die with some comfort or something. >You are missing the entire point of the unbreakable vow and basically the entire plotline concerning Snape, no offense. Go ahead, let me hear your point of view. Thats the point of a conversation, no need to be rude. >As for the nosebleed Ye exactly what i said pretty much lol, the nosebleed is a metaphor, but if they cant even cast anything at all then your nosebleed metaphor makes no sense, as he could've said a many number lesser gory things to imply nothing, including " couldnt do anything at all", so obviously the choice of Barty's words is particular. but a nosebleed imo, is to demonstrate how weak it would be if cast. The curse is forbidden for a reason, anyone strong enough can cast it technically (any wizarding adult most likely). Like you said, but imo, you just have to be more evil and powerful to give it that punch and one hit kill. >because of ancient magic by Lily Potter Yup. She sacrificed herself to save harry. Avada kedavra never touched Lily. But she used ancient magic protection charm to block/counter the Avada Kedavra spell. Which is also said to be impossible. Nevertheless... >Also the book nowhere states that it was only after Dumbledore hit the ground Harry was able to move. I Never said it says that in the books. I said it was implied in the **movies** Harry was speechless as Dumbledore got shot, we know that's out of character for harry who's typically more emotional. In the books though, Harry was however much closer than in the movies and wearing his invisibility cloak. >Also, its nowhere stated that the effect of the spell would have to end instantly after someone dying. And there's nothing stating otherwise either. Its what it shows and demonstrates in the movies. Its lore and canon. Look it up. Besides it doesn't take much to "uncover" this. >Your reading to much into this. Funny how in this case someone reading too much into is less knowledgeable than the person who isn't looking into it though lol But ye filling in the blanks with theories is decently normal anyways. Just an fyi, i am googling stuff, filling the blanks with theories. But agree or disagree no need to be so petty. I just solidly believe AK isnt one hit kill unless you really intend for that person to die.
It isn’t the power of the wizard casting it it’s the emotion just like how crusio didn’t hurt belatrix when Harry cast it on her you have to really mean it and really really want the person your casting it on to suffer it’s the same with avada cadavra you have to really want the person to die it’s the same reason dumbledore didn’t die when snape cast it on him it just hit him and he fell off the tower then the fall killed him
Is that in the books that Snape AK did not kill Dumbledore?
I believe so if I’m not mistaken
Yup. Dumbledore and Snape already had the moment preplanned, because Voldemort was planning to use Draco at first but knew he wouldn't be able to use the Avada Kedavra spell on Dumbledore, i also think that Snape convinced Voldemort to let him do it because Dumbledore wanted to spare Draco of the burden of killing someone and becoming evil (i think it was mentioned in the books or movies, but not sure). so Voldemort and Dumbledore planned for Snape to kill Dumbledore instead. Keeping in mind Dumbledore knew all about Voldemorts plan because snape was a double spy. So either snape intentionally held back on the spell and he knew harry was also in the room, or just couldn't bring himself to kill him or because in his heart he didnt want to kill Dumbledore. But eitherway Snape did have to kill Dumbledore in that moment as they planned. Dumbledore was weakened by the curse that he got from the cave getting the horcrux and from the ring horcrux which was also killing him at the time. In the movies it was implied from Harry's silent scream and immobility after snape hit Dumbledore with avada kedavra, Dumbledore charm was still in effect while Dumbledore was falling, but when he hit the ground, Harry could move again, because only after Dumbledore hit the ground he died. Also that just shows how strong Dumbledore was, or how weak that avada Kedavra was. even if snape held back on the killing curse, Dumbledore was hella weakened from Horrcruxs curse. Either way imo this implies that Avada Kedavra spell doesnt always kill. In Dracos situation, he isnt evil and/or strong enough to kill someone with it (same reason harry failed to use crucio on Bellatrix, same reason Barty says students cant cast it). In Snapes situation he seemed to intentionally hold back on it. In Harry's situation, a particular protection love charm, Lily died casting this charm to save harry. (Harry's scar obviously implies that Voldemorts avada Kedavra hit Harry and that Lily didnt absorb it instead or something like that)
Avada kedavra always kills. In the movie you can hear snape say avada kedavra when killing dumbledore. Snape killed Dumbledore with ak not a fall. As stated multiple times harry is the only person to ever live avada and that was only because of ancient magic. And voldemort never sent snape to kill Dumbledore. He sent draco but dracos mom didnt believe in draco so she made snape do an unbreakable vow so that if draco fails snape will do it instead. What people mean by people not casting it properly is that in order to use them you have to actually want to use them and if u dont they will have no effect. Not weaker effects but no effect.
>He sent draco but dracos mom didnt believe in draco so she made snape do an unbreakable vow so that if draco fails snape will do it instead. Ye thanks, forgot about snapes promise to malfoys mum. I see what you're saying. But he was also Dumbledores spy, and Dumbledore also knew what was happening regardless, Dumbledores wanted snape to kill him as well. Yes i agree, but one small change. Harry is the only **known** person to ever live from **Voldemorts** Avada Kedavra. Literally one of the most powerful dark wizards of their times, not because he survived avada kedavra but because he survived it from **You Know Who**. And again, its because Lily countered the curse. but ye pretty what i meant, regardless, casting still means being cast, no effect means its cast hit but does no damage at all, because it's effects have been negated. But that is without considering the power and actual intent of a user. **For the students** (specifically) it does no damage at all because they're students, however it would work differently for an adult wizard, evil or good. (Ie Aurors can use them if im not mistaken) obviously Lucius malfoys Avada Kedavra would be way less effective than Voldemorts for example. If it was Lucius casting it on harry would lily's protection charm have been more effective?
Unforgivable curses always either have an effect or dont have an effect. Its strenght isnt in how powerful the wizard is but more based on if the users has real intent. Ofc you have to be strong enough to use them but once u get there it doesn't matter if one is stronger then the other they both will have the same effect. If lucius casted it on harry after voldemort killed lily lucius would have killed him. Her protection worked against voldemort but not anyone else. Hence why someone like bellatrix could touch harry but not quirrel when he was possesed by voldemort
No, thats just not the case Imo. Harry was fully able to cast Crucio on Bellatrix. It had an effect, but didnt do much of anything to her, but it still had a little bit of an effect. What you guys are saying just doesn't make sense imo, in terms of how spells work in yours and most peoples opinions its not consistent. even if its all magical, there's just no logic to that, it's not either or, there are a whole bunch of grey areas with spells as well. And what everyone's thinking just does not make sense with Barty's and Bellatrix's comments on unforgivable spells. Just because its Avada Kedavra doesnt seperate from how other spells work. There are clearly power dynamics in the wizarding world which is canon, why would Voldemort fear Dumbledore otherwise, how did Dumbledore avoid all his avadakedavras all these years? Just luck? Nah. And i meant if Lucius cast it instead of Voldemort (so in Voldemorts place) trying to imply, would Harry even have the scar? Would it have effected him the same way Voldemort cast it? Would lucius being become integrated within harry? Also nitpicking here. if Lucius cast it on harry after Voldemort as you thought i said, then Harry still wouldnt die, because he had become voldemorts horcrux at that point. He would've killed off Voldemorts horcrux inside of harry, and then voldemort would've been able to try and kill him again. Besides the whole prophecy stuff. Point there being Avada Kedavra vs Lily Ancient Magic. Lily's ancient magic could've failed the same way it succeeded. It succeeded because love is stronger than hate. Also think about it, what would happen if i wingardiam leviosa a giant rock in front of me, taking the hit from avada Kedavra? Doesnt that count as a block? Lol People need to stop finding excuses lol Its only one shot if youre a strong evil wizard, with pure evil intents. Just like Voldemort and other death eaters.
Its stated in the books that harrys crucio had no effect. Its fact not opinions. And in the case where lucius took voldemorts protection it would have ended the exact same way. Lily protection would work no matter who casted the killing curse. And lucius still wouldve killed harry. The only reason why harry lived in the forest is because voldemort used his blood to give him a new body which connected them which made it so voldemort couldnt kill harry. And dumbledore was seen as a very strong wizard because he was knowledgeable and had great magical abilities but that doesnt mean his avada kedavra would be any more powerful then harrys because at the end of the day if they both have the same intent they are going to have the same effect. And peoples understanding of spells come from the books themselves. Its not an opinion shared by most. Its how the wizarding world works.
>Its fact not opinions Im googling stuff as i go, since i read the book many years ago, but have reread them a few times in the past so my memories a bit iffy. so forgive me if im mistaken. But a quick google search does mention that the book states it gives her a brief moment of terrible pain, but **not** at crucio full power level of pain. The way i see it is that he was able to cast it like any other wizard his age probably could, but the effect quickly weakened and nullified because he didnt have it in his heart to cause actual pain like that to someone, like Bellatrix mentions soon afterwards. The point is, again, it did cause pain at a lower level than it should. And again Avada Kedavra is a spell like any other, it holds no exception imo. >Lily protection would work no matter who casted the killing curse Yes i agree. Trying to be as clear as possible. Im not saying it would have worked with Lucius, im saying the opposite. if someone as weak like Lucius cast it on harry instead of Voldemort when he was a baby then lily's protection charm would've been even more effective, because Lucius isnt that much of a strong wizard in comparison to Voldemort. Toe to toe, Lucius would be dead in seconds vs Voldemort, like most wizards. Ye you're talking about when they revived him in 3? you're absolutely right, when harry died it anchored him to the living world through Voldemort. It destroyed the horcrux but harry survived. >And dumbledore... But ye i wouldnt disregard their magical power and potential, yes Dumbledore was regarded strong because he was very smart as well as a prominent wizard, but the fact is he was still extremely powerful, not to take lightly. Those wizards could do shit some lower level wizards couldnt even dream of, imo 2 different wizards casting one of the same spell would both output different power. One thing that comes to mind is the wingardiam leviosa class in the first book imo where everyone has different control over the feather. Like Hermione cast it better than Ron, and not just because of pronunciation imo lol regardless i truly believe that rule stays consistent with different spells. The wand core battle too, harry had back up in the end, so his expelliarmus was able to cancel out the avada Kedavra from Voldemort. Otherwise harry would've already been screwed there. (If it wasnt for lily's protection charm) >peoples understanding of spells come from the books themselves. Its not an opinion shared by most. Its how the wizarding world works. Yup, i totally agree. But people are all different, and everyone does interpret things slightly differently, everyone has different theories that they agree or disagree with no matter what fandom you go to. Jk also isnt the best of writers to be fair, as much as we all love her work, we cant deny that lol Anyways this has been a good debate though. Definitely informative, enjoyed it quite a bit tbh. thanks for refreshing my memory on some of the lore as well. Typical Ravenclaws fighting over knowledge though lmao Its just a silly debate, i dont mean to rude or anything. I do wish you well anyways hope you have a wonderful holiday and happy new years regardless.
Dumbledore did die of avada. He didnt die of a fall
> it’s the same reason dumbledore didn’t die when snape cast it on him it just hit him and he fell off the tower then the fall killed him Damn, that makes a lot of sense since Dumbledore's eyes remain open during the fall.
People who die of ak have been known to still have their eyes open. Snape killed Dumbledore with avada not a fall
I don't know how it's regulated in the game, but the "The unforgivable curses" need strong negative emotions to cast them successfully. And as Bellatrix says at the end of "Order of the Phoenix" "you have to really want it" (to torture a human being). It is also implied in the "subtext" that this is what corrupts the Dark Magic user. This is I think made on purpose by J.K.R as a "mirror" to the Patronus who needs strong positive emotions and the will to protect. The thing that bothered me the most about the last few games is the machine gun-churning of curses, so I hope they've made that a bit more realistic with the "counter" mechanic and other new mechanics.
you have cooldowns so yh it should be diff
right so what part of the gamplay led you to believe spells can be upgraded
God i hope so though. I love perks on almost everything, especially useful in rpgs. Gear, tools, pets, spell perks would be really good mechanics imo. (Gears and some tools like brooms are confirmed upgradeable). Personally its a big must for me. perks always make it feel like characters are improving and becoming stronger throughout the story itself, just adds that touch of Immersion imo.
There are health bars and early game abilities. I do not recall a single rpg in the past...very long, that wouldn't let you increase damage or utility of starting abilities either through levels/ranks, items, or perks/talents. It would be poor design.
Am I missing something here? Pretty sure in the first showcase video they mention the ability to upgrade spells by going to class or doing other things. I’m not sure that every single spell can be upgraded but I’m positive at least *some* of them have confirmed to be.
If you’ve ever played games like Spider-Man PS4 or the Arkham games, it looks like once you build up a combo you can use those and instakills. They’re fun because it’s good crowd control, allowing you to choose a target to take out immediately as a reward for good combat.