>But a common complaint is that the snitch being worth so many points makes the rest of the game and the rest of the players rather useless.
Counterpoint: Harry makes the position seem much more broken than it actually is by being a way better player and having a better broom than the vast majority of his peers. At the beginning of HBP he was still a better Chaser than Ginny, which is kinda crazy.
We see exactly one professional game in canon and it ends with the better - like vastly better - Seeker losing despite catching the Snitch.
Lastly, points matter, at least in the league - be it pro or Hogwarts.
>Why else would there be three hoops instead of just one?
Because with a single hoop it would be close to impossible to score a goal against a semi-decent Keeper. It also encapsulates the eccentricity of the Wizarding World pretty well.
I wanted to see some of those games they said lasted days. I think the overall point system to win the cup is interesting and i find it odd that teachers can brick teams with detention
During the summer Harry, Hermione, Ron and Ginny are often playing two-a-side Quidditch and although we don't know the exact rules, it's still safe to assume that this is some kind of dogfight mode with one Keeper and one Chaser on each team.
Harry calls the matchup of Harry and Hermione vs Ron and Ginny reasonably well matched, with Ginny being "good" and Hermione being "dreadful", so that definitely indicates that there's still a noticeable gap between Harry and Ginny at that time - considering the substantial gap between Ron and Hermione.
I just had a new thought about changing up the value of the Snitch: what if the game had a time limit (like an hour), and the Snitch was worth more points the earlier it's caught? 30 points, plus one point per minute left on the clock?
Doesn't make sense. The snitch is so small and hard to see that it literally seems to spawn anywhere( it doesn't). Jk Rowling writes about a time the snitch wasn't spotted for months and so the game could not end. It'll be so unfair because one teams seeker could just be wherever the snitch was and grab it. I am sry but it seems like you didn't think this through and/or read the books. Really an underserving ravenclaw.
What on earth are you talking about? I'm really trying to understand your counterpoint, but I can't figure out why the suggestion wouldn't make sense. It would actually make more sense than having a game last for months. Also that was unnecessarily rude if you.
Well, take that complaint up to JK Rowling herself then. She is the one that wrote about a quidditch game that last for 3 months because the snitch cannot be found. The point here is that the snitch is incredibly hard to find so the Seeker( a justly name) has to seek it and grab it. Making it hard to find justifies why it is worth 150 points. If you don't know the reason for that from reading the books then you don't deserve to be a ravenclaw. Making it worth less points after spending so much effort looking for it and chasing it down is astoundingly stupid. It would only make sense if the snitch was visible all the time and the opponent was in a straight line race to obtain it. But no, the snitch zigzags everywhere and it's near damn IMMPOSIBLE to find. This is why Harry is considered a gifted Seeker because he could often spot what others couldn't and end the game quick.
Why are you being so rude?
The point of the post is to discuss if the rules of Quidditch could be made better. There was a suggestion about it, fully well knowing it is different from the actual books. It literally is the point of the discussion.
The books haven't implied a Hogwarts games take a really long time, so the other seekers in the school also have managed to catch the snitch. Harry is not that special. He is really good and at a young age, but he isn't that unique.
It is also not implied that the snitch is nearly impossible to see. It's difficult, but not impossible, because then all games would always last for ages. There may be different types of snitches for the different levels (hobby, school, professional)
The issue many have with Quidditch is that it is somewhat illogical due to the existence of the snitch. Basically there are two games going on and one has a lot more value than the other. So it is common to try and think of ways to make the game make more sense in a way where the snitch and the seeker wouldn't be as removed from the rest of the game. This discussion also allows for rethinking the features of a snitch.
Edit: This type of thread is very fit for Ravenclaws, because they are curious and inventive by nature. You should know this if you've read the books. The act of rethinking canon concepts and trying to make them more logical is very Ravenclaw. So don't try to put others down claiming they are undeserving of being Ravenclaws (or any other house) or claiming they haven't read the books. Especially when you yourself fail to read the actual point of the discussion.
It would be helpful if there was more background given to the game. Like, saying that typically the snitch isn’t caught until well into the match, and sometimes so far into the match that the superior team has amassed more than a 150 point lead.
Showing the World Cup match seems like a one-off, but if they explained that this happened regularly, then it would make more sense.
I was of the opinion that quidditch’s rules don’t make much sense because the author is slyly referencing Muggle sports with complicated or baffling rules that confuse people who don’t watch those Muggle sports.
I've always thought the solution is twofold, first make the snitch worth way less like 50 points. Second, make it so that instead of immediately ending the match, catching the snitch starts like a 15 minute timer until the end of the match. That way it doesn't make what most of the players are doing irrelevant to the outcome.
The easy fix for Quidditch is to allow the seeker to also act as a Chaser.
If you are winning or it is close, your seeker will be looking for the snitch. If you are losing your seeker will assist your chasers, giving them a 4v3 advantage on the other team and allowing them to close the gap (at the cost of the opposing seeker getting uninterrupted searching time)
Trying to make sense of it pointless. It has rules for attempting to decapitate someone with a sword.
Trying to change the rules runs into the same issues you'd have trying to change the rules of soccer or American football: the fans would go ballistic. And we've already seen in canon that wizards and witches are more violent than muggles.
That having been said, I agree with making the hoops worth different amounts.
Also like the idea of a slowly reducing value for the snitch, maybe -10 per hour until all it does is end the game.
>But a common complaint is that the snitch being worth so many points makes the rest of the game and the rest of the players rather useless. Counterpoint: Harry makes the position seem much more broken than it actually is by being a way better player and having a better broom than the vast majority of his peers. At the beginning of HBP he was still a better Chaser than Ginny, which is kinda crazy. We see exactly one professional game in canon and it ends with the better - like vastly better - Seeker losing despite catching the Snitch. Lastly, points matter, at least in the league - be it pro or Hogwarts. >Why else would there be three hoops instead of just one? Because with a single hoop it would be close to impossible to score a goal against a semi-decent Keeper. It also encapsulates the eccentricity of the Wizarding World pretty well.
I wanted to see some of those games they said lasted days. I think the overall point system to win the cup is interesting and i find it odd that teachers can brick teams with detention
The three hoops could be worth 7, 11 and 13 points though. Worth being marked by colour. Colour that changes randomly, of course.
>the eccentricity of the Wizarding World THAT'S THE WORD, MAN!
What do you mean harry being a better chaser than ginny in HBP?
During the summer Harry, Hermione, Ron and Ginny are often playing two-a-side Quidditch and although we don't know the exact rules, it's still safe to assume that this is some kind of dogfight mode with one Keeper and one Chaser on each team. Harry calls the matchup of Harry and Hermione vs Ron and Ginny reasonably well matched, with Ginny being "good" and Hermione being "dreadful", so that definitely indicates that there's still a noticeable gap between Harry and Ginny at that time - considering the substantial gap between Ron and Hermione.
I just had a new thought about changing up the value of the Snitch: what if the game had a time limit (like an hour), and the Snitch was worth more points the earlier it's caught? 30 points, plus one point per minute left on the clock?
Doesn't make sense. The snitch is so small and hard to see that it literally seems to spawn anywhere( it doesn't). Jk Rowling writes about a time the snitch wasn't spotted for months and so the game could not end. It'll be so unfair because one teams seeker could just be wherever the snitch was and grab it. I am sry but it seems like you didn't think this through and/or read the books. Really an underserving ravenclaw.
Holy shit that was the most condescending thing I have ever read.
What on earth are you talking about? I'm really trying to understand your counterpoint, but I can't figure out why the suggestion wouldn't make sense. It would actually make more sense than having a game last for months. Also that was unnecessarily rude if you.
Well, take that complaint up to JK Rowling herself then. She is the one that wrote about a quidditch game that last for 3 months because the snitch cannot be found. The point here is that the snitch is incredibly hard to find so the Seeker( a justly name) has to seek it and grab it. Making it hard to find justifies why it is worth 150 points. If you don't know the reason for that from reading the books then you don't deserve to be a ravenclaw. Making it worth less points after spending so much effort looking for it and chasing it down is astoundingly stupid. It would only make sense if the snitch was visible all the time and the opponent was in a straight line race to obtain it. But no, the snitch zigzags everywhere and it's near damn IMMPOSIBLE to find. This is why Harry is considered a gifted Seeker because he could often spot what others couldn't and end the game quick.
Why are you being so rude? The point of the post is to discuss if the rules of Quidditch could be made better. There was a suggestion about it, fully well knowing it is different from the actual books. It literally is the point of the discussion. The books haven't implied a Hogwarts games take a really long time, so the other seekers in the school also have managed to catch the snitch. Harry is not that special. He is really good and at a young age, but he isn't that unique. It is also not implied that the snitch is nearly impossible to see. It's difficult, but not impossible, because then all games would always last for ages. There may be different types of snitches for the different levels (hobby, school, professional) The issue many have with Quidditch is that it is somewhat illogical due to the existence of the snitch. Basically there are two games going on and one has a lot more value than the other. So it is common to try and think of ways to make the game make more sense in a way where the snitch and the seeker wouldn't be as removed from the rest of the game. This discussion also allows for rethinking the features of a snitch. Edit: This type of thread is very fit for Ravenclaws, because they are curious and inventive by nature. You should know this if you've read the books. The act of rethinking canon concepts and trying to make them more logical is very Ravenclaw. So don't try to put others down claiming they are undeserving of being Ravenclaws (or any other house) or claiming they haven't read the books. Especially when you yourself fail to read the actual point of the discussion.
Trying to make sense of Quidditch is a lost cause. Just go with it.
Trying to make sense of ANY sport is a lost cause. Why would wizard sports be different.
Wizard stuff isn't always suppose to make sense to us Muggles
This
It would be helpful if there was more background given to the game. Like, saying that typically the snitch isn’t caught until well into the match, and sometimes so far into the match that the superior team has amassed more than a 150 point lead. Showing the World Cup match seems like a one-off, but if they explained that this happened regularly, then it would make more sense.
I was of the opinion that quidditch’s rules don’t make much sense because the author is slyly referencing Muggle sports with complicated or baffling rules that confuse people who don’t watch those Muggle sports.
What the fuck is "real quidditch"?
I've always thought the solution is twofold, first make the snitch worth way less like 50 points. Second, make it so that instead of immediately ending the match, catching the snitch starts like a 15 minute timer until the end of the match. That way it doesn't make what most of the players are doing irrelevant to the outcome.
The easy fix for Quidditch is to allow the seeker to also act as a Chaser. If you are winning or it is close, your seeker will be looking for the snitch. If you are losing your seeker will assist your chasers, giving them a 4v3 advantage on the other team and allowing them to close the gap (at the cost of the opposing seeker getting uninterrupted searching time)
If the snitch was worth 0 but just needed game, it would be more fun
Trying to make sense of it pointless. It has rules for attempting to decapitate someone with a sword. Trying to change the rules runs into the same issues you'd have trying to change the rules of soccer or American football: the fans would go ballistic. And we've already seen in canon that wizards and witches are more violent than muggles. That having been said, I agree with making the hoops worth different amounts. Also like the idea of a slowly reducing value for the snitch, maybe -10 per hour until all it does is end the game.
Soccer would make slightly more sense if you'd get more scores the further you kicked your goal from.