Skip to main content
27 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 25, 2019 at 17:01 history protected CommunityBot
Jul 1, 2017 at 13:43 history edited Gallifreyan
edited tags
Apr 11, 2015 at 21:02 answer added Valorum timeline score: 14
S May 4, 2014 at 17:17 history bounty ended CommunityBot
S May 4, 2014 at 17:17 history notice removed CommunityBot
May 3, 2014 at 0:17 comment added Daz C @TomLynd The difference is comparable to beating soldier with a cannon vs a cat with a cannon. Soldiers may have the expertise to operate cannons but cats have intimate knowledge of explosive projectiles. Depending on the individual, disarming a soldier from his weapon is a matter of time. But if you're facing a cat, just get outta there.
May 2, 2014 at 23:12 answer added mustard timeline score: 0
Apr 30, 2014 at 6:38 answer added Ritzz081 timeline score: -6
Apr 29, 2014 at 19:07 answer added BrassApparatus timeline score: 13
S Apr 26, 2014 at 15:53 history bounty started Tom Lynd
S Apr 26, 2014 at 15:53 history notice added Tom Lynd Draw attention
Apr 22, 2014 at 15:28 comment added Tom Lynd @XantexDumbledore didn't really beat the Elder wand, but instead beat the man (Grindelwald) No offence but whats the difference?
Apr 18, 2014 at 13:21 review Suggested edits
Apr 18, 2014 at 13:33
Apr 16, 2014 at 16:56 comment added Slytherincess @Xantec -- Actually, I was just offering that quote for your consideration, since you asked about the wand being as powerful as the wizard who owns it. That's all. The quote suggests the possibility, but is not definitive, IMO. I don't believe this question has an answer based in canon.
Apr 16, 2014 at 15:45 comment added Xantec @Slytherincess Maybe it implies that. Expertise isn't the same as raw power. If there is a difference in power between wizards then you might be the most expert as casting spells but perhaps not be able to achieve the same output as someone less talented but with more power. I'll leave it to you to answer if canon supports differences in raw power between wizards, as you know the lore much better than I.
Apr 16, 2014 at 15:40 history edited Slytherincess CC BY-SA 3.0
minor grammar
Apr 16, 2014 at 15:39 comment added Slytherincess @Xantec -- In Tales of Beedle the Bard it does say this about wands: Those who are knowledgeable about wandlore will agree that wands do indeed absorb the expertise of those who use them, though this is an unpredictable and imperfect business; one must consider all kinds of additional factors, such as the relationship between the wand and the user, to understand how well it is likely to perform with any particular individual. So this implies that often a wand becomes as powerful as its master, but that it's not written in stone that this will always happen.
Apr 16, 2014 at 14:21 comment added TGnat I've drastically reworded the question to get at what I think the core intent. Please roll back if I have misrepresented you original intent.
Apr 16, 2014 at 14:19 history edited TGnat CC BY-SA 3.0
Reworded question... A lot!
S Apr 16, 2014 at 12:01 history suggested Stark07 CC BY-SA 3.0
improved title.
Apr 16, 2014 at 11:04 review Suggested edits
S Apr 16, 2014 at 12:01
Apr 14, 2014 at 17:54 comment added DVK-on-Ahch-To No canon info I know of (including Pottermore)
Apr 14, 2014 at 17:17 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackSciFi/status/455756650964877312
Apr 14, 2014 at 15:31 comment added Tom Lynd @Xantec I read it somewhere in the books but I don't remember it now
Apr 14, 2014 at 15:28 comment added Xantec Dumbledore didn't really beat the Elder wand, but instead beat the man (Grindelwald) behind it: scifi.stackexchange.com/a/12566/1234 Also, do you have a quote for saying that the wand is as powerful as it's master? The wand chooses the wizard, but I don't recall it being said it was necessarily as powerful as said wizard.
Apr 14, 2014 at 15:11 history edited Kevin CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1 characters in body; edited tags
Apr 14, 2014 at 15:03 history asked Tom Lynd CC BY-SA 3.0