We see through the books that there are numerous ways to get in and out of Hogwarts:

  • By Train
  • Flying car
  • Secret passage to Hogsmeade
  • Through the lake
  • Through vanishing cabinet

It looks like there are a lot of way to get in and out of Hogwarts (except apparition).

What was the reason for such a complex plan (tweaking goblet, helping Harry to win, taking control over Harry's opponents)? It feels like it would be much simpler for fake Moody to just knock Harry on his head and walk away with him.

  • 2
    From HPMOR :) - "Moody had once seen an addicted Dark Wizard go to ridiculous lengths to get a victim to lay hands on a certain exact portkey, instead of just having someone toss the target a trapped Knut on their next visit to town; and after going to all that work, the addict had gone to the further effort to lay a second Portus, on the same portkey, which had, on a second touch, transported the victim back to safety. To this day, even taking the drug into account, Moody could not imagine what could have possibly been going through the man's mind at the time he had cast the second Portus." – K-H-W Dec 22 '17 at 22:01
  • @Valorum I don't see it as a duplicate. The other question is specifically about using a specific portkey rather than any other portkey. This question is about why a portkey was necessary at all if there are various other ways of travel. The answer to this question might be that Moody/Crouch didn't have access to any of those other forms of travel, which is not (and would not) be covered by the other question and its answers. That said, I don't have a monopoly on voting. Anyone is allowed to disagree with me and override me with either another Gold Badge or five regular votes. – Alex Dec 23 '18 at 18:43
  • @Alex - Given that the question has already gone through review and is elderly, a more appropriate action (imho) would have been to ask a meta question if you think it's not a dupe. Now other people need to waste time undoing your actions – Valorum Dec 23 '18 at 18:47
  • @Valorum I don't think a Meta post is necessary every time something like this happens. I think people would probably find it more annoying and time-consuming to deal with a Meta post each time than to simply vote to re-close if they disagree with my actions. To my mind, a Meta post for something like this is usually for when the regular mechanisms aren't achieving the desired results — e.g. if people don't vote to reclose then you would write a Meta post arguing for its closure, and if I would fail to reopen a question I could write a Meta post arguing for its reopening. – Alex Dec 23 '18 at 18:59

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.