Timeline for In the Harry Potter universe, why are spells that can affect lots of targets at once used rarely?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:43 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://scifi.stackexchange.com/ with https://scifi.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jun 12, 2014 at 0:22 | answer | added | user24308 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jun 11, 2014 at 10:27 | comment | added | Jon Hanna | @Raphael well, I personally have knives but don't have any artillery, so I lack that option while wizards in HP do not lack the equivalent. That said, I do think you're onto something, and there's a reason why police officers don't use flamethrowers for busting petty thieves. Or at least, they won't until there are Homeland Security grants for flamethrowers. | |
| Jun 11, 2014 at 9:19 | comment | added | Raphael | Equivalent question: given that we have artillery, why do we primarily use knives and handguns in street fights? | |
| Jun 11, 2014 at 8:36 | comment | added | Nescient | Here it's fairly easy to say that, out there it's different.. | |
| Jun 11, 2014 at 7:10 | comment | added | Nzall | Probably the same reason the military prefers precision drone strikes over carpet bombing these days. Collateral damage and friendly fire should be avoided. | |
| Jun 11, 2014 at 4:00 | comment | added | user16696 | @TheodorosChatzigiannakis I think op is asking about Area-of-effect spells, not multi-target spells. Think Bazooka instead of Dual Pistols. | |
| Jun 11, 2014 at 1:24 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackSciFi/status/476535309245489152 | ||
| Jun 10, 2014 at 22:04 | history | edited | Möoz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Highlighted question.
|
| Jun 10, 2014 at 19:32 | comment | added | user11521 | Related: In the Star Trek universe, why is the highly useful "wide area stun" setting on phasers used so rarely? | |
| Jun 10, 2014 at 14:22 | answer | added | Andreas | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jun 10, 2014 at 12:47 | comment | added | Natural30 | Personally, I would guess it's for the same reason that people have two hands but rarely actually use two one-handed weapons, such as handguns and swords. Humans have finite attention and concentration capabilities, so you'd probably be less efficient (in absolute terms) with two weapons than if you'd be with one. | |
| Jun 10, 2014 at 10:45 | history | edited | Etheryte | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Jun 10, 2014 at 10:39 | history | edited | Stark07 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Jun 10, 2014 at 10:23 | comment | added | Saturn | Wizards too OP. Rowling nerfed them. | |
| Jun 10, 2014 at 10:20 | answer | added | CandiedMango | timeline score: 13 | |
| Jun 10, 2014 at 9:15 | history | edited | Etheryte | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 99 characters in body
|
| Jun 10, 2014 at 9:12 | comment | added | quapka | No means to contradict, but I think the fire in the RoR caused by Fiendfyre spell was so great mostly because of all the things that caught on fire, and then magnified by the effect of the Horcrux. | |
| Jun 10, 2014 at 9:02 | answer | added | Anthony Grist | timeline score: 26 | |
| Jun 10, 2014 at 8:09 | history | asked | Etheryte | CC BY-SA 3.0 |