Harry Potter Questions of canon events...

[seitora]

Something I just realised

In Prisoner of Azkaban, Lupin never transforms until he goes outside in the full moon.

So if that was the case, what's keeping him from just sealing himself in a dark basement with absolutely no windows every time the full moon occurs and not transforming?

Yes, plot convenience he happens to transform just as they go outside, but still

 

[Dunstan]

Something I just realised

In Prisoner of Azkaban, Lupin never transforms until he goes outside in the full moon.

So if that was the case, what's keeping him from just sealing himself in a dark basement with absolutely no windows every time the full moon occurs and not transforming?

Yes, plot convenience he happens to transform just as they go outside, but still

I do like that pottermore said that werewolves look like normal wolves, just with shorter noses, more human eyes, and, for some reason, lion tails....

Might of been said in the books, but I guess I've just seen the movie one to many times.... And man does it's werewolf suck.:mellow:

And for all of it contradicting past WOG(HP, I know, shocking isn't it ) that said Tom just lied about them, I also like the new explanation for the werewolf pups.

 

[ArchfiendRai]

Are there any mentions in the books of what ages Harry's accidental magic outbursts happened at?

 

[troutpeoples]

I forget the exact wording, mostly because I've only ever read book 7 once (before vowing never to do so again), but put simply, the Sword of Gryffindor absorbs the traits/abilities of a substance that is introduced to its blade or something, yeah? Well, I suppose first of all, are we supposed to believe that such a thing never happened before Basilisk venom got all over it (it never showed any other abilities beforehand, after all)? What other sweet-ass crap could it do already, with all the leftover shit collected through battles on that blade?

And second, what would happen if phoenix tears spilled all over the blade? Everyone you try to stab to death would just heal back up right quick.

 

[Hardcore Heathen]

I forget the exact wording, mostly because I've only ever read book 7 once (before vowing never to do so again), but put simply, the Sword of Gryffindor absorbs the traits/abilities of a substance that is introduced to its blade or something, yeah? Well, I suppose first of all, are we supposed to believe that such a thing never happened before Basilisk venom got all over it (it never showed any other abilities beforehand, after all)? What other sweet-ass crap could it do already, with all the leftover shit collected through battles on that blade?

And second, what would happen if phoenix tears spilled all over the blade? Everyone you try to stab to death would just heal back up right quick.

This sounds familiar...

 

[Rising Dragon]

I forget the exact wording, mostly because I've only ever read book 7 once (before vowing never to do so again), but put simply, the Sword of Gryffindor absorbs the traits/abilities of a substance that is introduced to its blade or something, yeah? Well, I suppose first of all, are we supposed to believe that such a thing never happened before Basilisk venom got all over it (it never showed any other abilities beforehand, after all)? What other sweet-ass crap could it do already, with all the leftover shit collected through battles on that blade?

And second, what would happen if phoenix tears spilled all over the blade? Everyone you try to stab to death would just heal back up right quick.

No, no, it doesn't work like that. It's of goblin make, and anything metal made by goblins is basically indestructible. It only takes in what would make the item itself stronger--so in this, turning it into a poisoned blade. It's debatable that phoenix tears would make the item stronger, so it likely wouldn't do anything to the sword.

 

[esran]

Besides, theres nothing saying things it absorbs end up permanent. the sword was untouched for hundreds of years, only its goblin make allowed it to remain a useful weapon at all.

 

[Hardcore Heathen]

I'm too drunk to make a new thread for this on my phone.

http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/85367803.html

So. Validation from the author: Ron/Hermione was a bad idea?

 

[Fellgrave]

I've thought that for years. I'm just stunned Rowling actually went and said as much.

...oh my. I can't wait for the ensuing firestorm that comes from this. *rubs hands together gleefully*

 

[Emerald Oracle]

BWAHAHAHHAHAHAAH. That is all.

I wonder if this lends credence to the theory that the death threats pushed her towards that pairing?

 

[Herdo]

Can only humans be affected/infected by lycanthropy, or can half-breeds or other species also be affected/infected by the illness?

What stopped the spider colony from expanding their territory in forest after Aragog died?

 

[nixofcyzerra]

Don't think about it. That way of thinking leads to shitty Veela/Vampire/Werewolf hybrid bullshit.

And the Centaurs, maybe?

 

[Shirotsume]

Another question: why exactly did the centaur put up with Hagrid's bullshit?

He stuffed so much dangerous stuff in that forest haha.

 

[Rising Dragon]

Probably because Hagrid was more respectful of non-human life than most humans, and possibly because he wasn't completely human himself.

 

[Cynical Kyle]

Perhaps they couldn't do anything about him. Hagrid might be peaceful, but you don't mess around with half-giant wizard lightly.

 

[da_fox2279]

Question: I know that a lot of fics/authors tend to consider Hermione several months/a year older than the rest of the Golden Trio, given the Time Turner use in her third year, but given that she was petrified during the last half (?) of their second year, doesn't that nullify the time-travel just a bit? Say, by 4-6 months? (I'm unaware just how long she was petrified.)

 

[pidl]

Question: I know that a lot of fics/authors tend to consider Hermione several months/a year older than the rest of the Golden Trio, given the Time Turner use in her third year, but given that she was petrified during the last half (?) of their second year, doesn't that nullify the time-travel just a bit? Say, by 4-6 months? (I'm unaware just how long she was petrified.)

Hermione Jean Granger (b. 19 September, 1979)
Ronald Bilius "Ron" Weasley (b. 1 March, 1980)
Harry James Potter (b. 31 July, 1980)

Hermione is older by virtue of her parents getting it on sooner, not due to time travel shenanigans.

 

[da_fox2279]

Question: I know that a lot of fics/authors tend to consider Hermione several months/a year older than the rest of the Golden Trio, given the Time Turner use in her third year, but given that she was petrified during the last half (?) of their second year, doesn't that nullify the time-travel just a bit? Say, by 4-6 months? (I'm unaware just how long she was petrified.)

Hermione Jean Granger (b. 19 September, 1979)
Ronald Bilius "Ron" Weasley (b. 1 March, 1980)
Harry James Potter (b. 31 July, 1980)

Hermione is older by virtue of her parents getting it on sooner, not due to time travel shenanigans.

Ah. My bad. Was unaware of that. Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[seitora]

Was there anything in booKS Pottermore or interviews about societal views of second and third Gen magicals?

Like a child of two muggleborns obviously isn't a muggleborn himself but somewhere below half blood presumably, and then what of someone with four magical grandparents

Also damn auto correct

 

[troutpeoples]

I never thought of it before until a friend brought it up in an intense bitch-fest over Harry Potter; wasn't it highly likely that Sirius would have contracted Lycanthropy due to his fight with Lupin? When it's animal versus animal, there's going to be a lot more biting than there will clawing or anything else. The book says "...the dog seized [the werewolf] about the neck and pulled it backward, away from Ron and Pettigrew. They were locked, jaw to jaw, claws ripping at each other...", and the bolded bit indicates, to me, that there was in fact a great deal of gnawing at each other going on over there. Unless they were engaging in very awkward and angry doggie-kisses.

Granted, even if it would have taken place, Sirius being a werewolf likely wouldn't have changed a damn thing in the series; I was just surprised I'd never entertained the thought of it before.

 

[Chuckg]

If Sirius' jaws are around Remus' neck from behind (note that he pulls Remus away from Ron while Remus was coming at Ron, meaning Sirius is gripping him from the back) then Remus is not in any position to bite him. 'Jaw to jaw' means their heads are right alongside each other, not that they're mutually biting.

 

[seitora]

Even if it was, I'm half tempted to say it could be handwaved as saying that by having an Animagus form already, a werewolf curse can't override it.

 

[Rising Dragon]

Arguably I'd be more worried about curse scars.

 

[seitora]

Was there any purpose for blood beside blood protection and resurrecting Voldemort?

I feel like with the amount of fanon there is about Dumbledore or whoever using Harry's blood to track him or bind him into a contract or whatever, since Voldemort post-book 4 has Harry's blood, it should affect him too

 

[Shirotsume]

That would be hilarious level lulz, especially if they also pointed to the Horcruxs/alt universe where they don't exist.

"Cornelius, Voldemort is back."

"No! He just can't be back, you're trying to destab-"

"And thankfully I've prepared for this. We have his location already. How much of an accident are we going to portkey in?"

"-alize the ministry...? Oh. Uh... big enough that the reporters can see it."