LESSWRONG
LW

Comment Permalink
gRR20

"You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation." (DH Ch 33)

That's exactly the point - whether an act is a "murder" or a "mercy" depends on the intent of the person performing the act. Murder splits the soul, mercy doesn't. And only Snape alone knows which one he would do.

Reply
glumph00

You're right. I was thinking in terms of the difference between murder and attempted murder, when the important difference here is between murderous killing and non-murderous killing.

It still seems true that one's soul will only split in the case of successful murder.

Reply
See in context
by Oscar_Cunningham
1 min read
1182

9

EDIT: New discussion thread here.

 

This is a new thread to discuss Eliezer Yudkowsky's Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality and anything related to it. With two chapters recently the previous thread has very quickly reached 500 comments. The latest chapter as of 17th March 2012 is Ch. 79.

There is now a site dedicated to the story at hpmor.com, which is now the place to go to find the authors notes and all sorts of other goodies. AdeleneDawner has kept an archive of Author's Notes. (This goes up to the notes for chapter 76, and is now not updating. The authors notes from chapter 77 onwards are on hpmor.com.)


The first 5 discussion threads are on the main page under the harry_potter tag.  Threads 6 and on (including this one) are in the discussion section using its separate tag system.  Also: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten.

As a reminder, it's often useful to start your comment by indicating which chapter you are commenting on.

Spoiler Warning:  this thread is full of spoilers.  With few exceptions, spoilers for MOR and canon are fair game to post, without warning or rot13.  More specifically:

You do not need to rot13 anything about HP:MoR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).

If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it's fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that "Eliezer said X is true" unless you use rot13.

HPMOR (discussion & meta)
Personal Blog

9

Mentioned in
Load More (5/18)
Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 11
New Comment
Rendering 1000/1182 comments, sorted by
top scoring
(show more) Click to highlight new comments since:
Some comments are truncated due to high volume. (⌘F to expand all)Change truncation settings
[-]loserthree390

Dumbledore is a sonovabitch. Harry's wrong about how Snape heard the prophesy. Malfoy and Friends may be wrong about how Narcissa died. The whole matter of lighting a live chicken on fire may be a strange misunderstanding. But Dumbledore is still a right bastard for what he did to Snape, which we may put together from chapters 17, 18, 27, & the renumbered 76.

Chapters 17 & 76 tell us how Snape pursued Lily while he was her friend. (Or that's what Snape thinks of what he was doing. He was probably a 'Nice Guy' about it and it would probably have failed in the usual fashion. But that wasn't allowed to happen.)

To be clear: despite the (deservedly) doomed-to-the-friendzone fate of Snape's attempts to woo Lily, Dumbeldore nonetheless stepped in and instigated fights between Snape and Lily by writing things in Lily's potions book. While headmaster and responsible for the well being of children, Dumbledore sabotaged a relationship between children! He might even have done this because it did not fit the story he foresaw for a very Slytherin Snape to remain friends with a pretty and heroic Lily. He might have done it for even worse reasons.

Yes, worse. Dumbledore said, "H... (read more)

Reply
[-]Xachariah320

It is my hope that Snape will read Lily's fifth year potions book, will understand that Dumbledore ruined his like, will dedicate himself to killing Dumbledore, and will be successful before the close of the fic.

Snape killing Dumbledore? I don't know, it sounds a little far-fetched.

Reply
[-]Vaniver140

Something similar to the technique you describe is known as gaslighting.

Reply
[-]Joshua Hobbes120

Snape actually murdering Dumbledore at some point is too MoR-ish of an event for Eliezer not to include.

Reply
4Dentin
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance. Dumbledore in this fic is far from perfect and all-seeing.
8fezziwig
...which implies that, in the course of all these fights, Lilly never mentioned it to him. It's not enough for her to disbelieve his denials, she must never have given him an opportunity to make them. That being so, what were they arguing about? What sort of dialogue would you write for those scenes? What states of mind do you imagine for her? In other words: I notice that I am confused.
[-]loserthree150

If two people are in a relationship like very close friends, marriage or long-term dating, or just roommates, they often have fights about little things. These fights are not because the little things have some hidden importance that would make them not-little, but because there is a big thing that upset one or both people. They don't talk about the big thing. They never mention it. They may not understand that is why they are upset.

That is how people fight over toilet lids being left up, or dishes in the sink one day to many, or whose turn it is to take the garbage out, when what they are really hurt by is loss of autonomy, or financial insecurity, or fading intensity of intimacy, or some other big deal.

That is also why many couples cannot resolve longs series of fights on their own, and why couple's counseling works, most of the times when it does.

People rarely become rational communicators on their own.

And so she never told him.

Reply
2CronoDAS
This is a case of You Just Told Me - Harry offers that excuse to Dumbledore, who then goes on to repeat it back to him.
275th
Dumbledore didn't say that he caused the fights between Lily and Snape. He said this: "And", not "therefore" or "so". Bear in mind that this is the same scene earlier in which this takes place: We're told in big bright flashing letters not to take Dumbledore's implications in this scene at face value. And we already know why Lily and Snape actually fought: because Snape was turning evil! His best friends were wannabe Death Eaters! That's why Lily actually cut off their friendship, not because of jokes written in a Potions book. If anything, it seems like Dumbledore was trying to get Lily to think of Snape as someone who could be lighthearted and joke around, as someone who could put a smile on her face, to try to get her to have feelings for him so she could pull him away from the Death Eaters! Some parts of MoR!Dumbledore may be a mystery to us, but his desire for people to choose the light over the dark is patently obvious. Dumbledore would never, ever ruin someone's only chance to save themselves from serving Voldemort. He wouldn't.
4erratio
I doubt it. Eliezer originally thought that Lily was dating Snape, the passage was changed to refer to her "one of her friends" after readers pointed out that they'd never dated. And if they were originally assumed to be dating then Lily would have already had feelings for him - no need to meddle like that.
275th
You're totally right; I had forgotten about that. So I retracted my above comment, only to realize that it doesn't necessarily ruin my theory. Whether they were dating or merely friends, Lily and Snape would have fought over his Death Eater tendencies, and they are what would have ruined the relationship. Dumbledore could have seen their relationship falling apart and tried to reconcile it any way he could. But yeah, that seems a lot more far-fetched when you take Eliezer's prior mistake into consideration.
[-]75th370

Dumbledore correctly surmises part of Quirrellmort's motivation for this arc's events: he's neutralizing all of Light Harry's allies. What Dumbledore hasn't realized, what is completely outside his hypothesis space, is that he's not doing so to attack Harry, or at least not as part of a plan to defeat Harry. He's doing it to remove all of Harry's support except Quirrellmort himself, so as to hasten Harry's consumption by his Dark Side. With only Quirrell to rely upon in the magical world, his conversion into Dark Harry will be much swifter.

Therefore, when speculating abut the rest of this arc, we must speculate about how this plan will neutralize the rest of Light Harry's allies: Dumbledore and McGonagall. Harry has already hinted that he intends to investigate Dumbledore the next time he sees Quirrell. Assuming Quirrell gets out of the Ministry without causing a scene, he will almost certainly have manufactured evidence that implicates Dumbledore, which he will show Harry.

So perhaps one of the "taboo tradeoffs" of the arc will be Harry successfully politically attacking the Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, the Supreme Mugwump of the International Confederation of Wizards... (read more)

Reply
[-]DanArmak140

Interesting. That's a kind of reverse taboo tradeoff.

In a normal taboo tradeoff, you sacrifice a sacred value (lives, torture, ideals) to gain a mundane value (money, jobs, political influence). Here Harry would be doing the reverse: sacrifice a huge amount of mundane value (Dumbledore's political standing and his being an ally to Harry) to gain a sacred value (Hermione's life and freedom).

For an ordinary thinker (i.e. not Harry or Quirrel), this might even feel like a morally imperative tradeoff, one you have no right not to make no matter what the amount of mundane value you lose.

Reply
375th
Ooh, you're right, from Harry's perspective. But if we take Dumbledore's word that there's no way Hermione will be sent to Azkaban or Kissed by a Dementor, then from everybody else's (or at least Dumbledore's allies') perspective, it would be a played-straight taboo tradeoff.
7SkyDK
From a strategic point of view having Light-Harry as a gullible ally is worth way more than having Dark-Harry be so knowingly. If the plot is to gain control of Magical Britain under one single leader who you puppeteer (him being embedded with your brain patterns and all) there'd be no sense in turning him dark now. The political strategist would rather: 1. Put Dumbledore in a bad position by allowing Harry to be the one to stand up for the students. Possibly in a way that humbles Dumbledore by the great "wisdom" of Harry, but meanwhile in a way that doesn't alienate Harry from Dumbledore's political allies before he's been groomed and positioned to lead them. A way to do this would be to present evidence that Harry would be able to deduct and present on basis of being the Boy-Who-Lived AND someone who actually thinks. It might very well involve Harry find out, and proof, that Snape burned the letters. Snape being a double turncoat means that he'd be an easy suspect. Quirrelmort already has good reason to see him gone (that's how he deals with traitors if you recall) plus it'd severely weaken Dumbledore's hold on the Slytherin part of Britain. Here the taboo trade-off is Snape's future who Dumbledore trades to keep the school. 2. Quirrelmort might already have been there for the duel between Hermione and Draco. Hence he'd have a memory of it and be able to pull that memory to a pensive. That memory would be enough to proof Hermione innocent. If this is the case Quirrelmort ends up distancing Harry from Lucius; which might be a good idea considering that Quirrelmort probably prefers to be the one in charge of the dark side and have Harry as a champion of the light. The taboo trade-off would then be Draco's father. I see no reason to make Harry appear dark. Actually I'd consider that extremely stupid since Quirrelmort has obtained all the political power he could hope to and now knows that that is not enough. He needs both the wolves and the sheep.
675th
Your reasoning makes sense, but I believe we're clearly supposed to understand that Harry's going over to his Dark Side was the premeditated purpose of Quirrell bringing the Dementor to Hogwarts in the first place. Quirrell's plan was defeated that day, more or less because of Harry's love (not romantic love, necessarily) for Hermione. That day Quirrell realized that to really turn Harry Dark, he had to neutralize those Harry holds dear.
2MinibearRex
I like the guess about Quirrellmort trying to remove Harry's allies, but there's a further detail I'm considering. Quirrellmort knows that Harry knows how to break people out of Azkaban. If Hermione is sent there, I would estimate a pretty high probability Harry would make a move to get her out. He would have to do something clever to divert suspicion away from himself, but that doesn't seem to be an insoluble problem. If Quirrell wanted to prevent this, the simplest way would be to blackmail Harry, but doing so would require him to overtly take a position as Harry's enemy, which he may not wish to do. Alternatively, he could sabotage Harry's plans, but Harry would almost certainly try again. Any situation in which Harry knows that Hermione is in trouble is an unstable equilibrium, and Quirrell presumably knows that. Additionally, you take it for granted that Quirrellmort is trying to turn Harry dark. What's the basis for that conclusion? I've got one guess, but it seems far-fetched.
3Eugine_Nier
Quirrellmort doesn't have to stop Harry, just make sure Hermione is already broken by the time he succeeds.
3DanArmak
The simplest way would be not to help him. Harry can't make portkeys to and from Azkaban himself, he can't Disillusion himself once inside, fight random Aurors in the corridors (bet they've tightened security for a while), and now he can't even leave Hogwarts against Dumbledore's will.
3Anubhav
Except that Dumbledore's pretty sure Hermione won't be sent to Azkaban. No reason not to take his word on this.
5DanArmak
We still haven't heard from Lucius, who'll decide what punishment to request from the Wizengamot. Maybe Quirrel has influenced him somehow. Either way I feel Lucius' POV is a major piece of missing information that may be preventing us from predicting the future.
1MinibearRex
You're right of course. I only really paid attention to Dumbledore saying it would be something in between the kiss and snapping her wand. But in any case, Hermione can't suffer any long term punishment without Harry trying to do something about it.
[-]Daniel_Starr310

Here's a secret in plain sight: if this story has a happy ending, then Harry has the power to destroy Quirrelmort's brain, anytime they're together.

First clue: the WRONG DON'T BAD IDEA messages when Harry tries to make contact with Quirrell. Assume that they mean just what they say -- that something terrible will happen if Harry makes contact.

Second clue: the prophecy appears to say that Harry and Voldemort's confrontation can only leave more or less one. Storytelling convention makes us think it's a metaphor or foreseeing complex future actions. But maybe there's just an already existing spell or condition, dating from the first encounter, that's primed to cause Harry+Voldemort = boom.

There's more. But just from these two clues alone, we can see that an available though seemingly extreme interpretation of data in the story is: "If Harry ever touches Quirrellmort, one or the other will be magically destroyed".

Now the subtler clues.

Third clue: in the original canon, Harry had a piece of Voldemort's soul in him, an accidentally created Horcrux, and the destruction of that piece of soul was a critical step in Voldemort's death.

Fourth clue: in our world's science, there's no ... (read more)

Reply
[-]buybuydandavis100

In consequence, if ever Quirrellmort and Harry come sufficiently into physical/magical contact, Quirrellmort anticipates that Harry's brain will turn into a vegetable as Harry-Voldemort destructively uploads itself into the "real" Quirrell-Voldemort, leaving behind a stronger and more complete Q+H-Voldemort.

How about the other way - Quirrellmort uploads into Harry? Make Harry the Dark Lord, and then upload into him.
Note that Voldemort has seemingly already uploaded into Quirrell.

"My... Lord... I went where you said to await you, but you did not come...

"Sshow her your face," hissed the snake at Harry's feet.

Harry cast back the hood of the Cloak of Invisibility.

"The scar..." muttered Bellatrix. "That child..."

"So they all still think," said Harry's voice, and gave a thin little chuckle. "You looked for me in the wrong place, Bella dear."

Bella is not particularly surprised to find Voldemort in a new body. And while there are other explanations, having Harry masquerade as Voldemort does set the stage for him to do it for real. It also gets Bella on Harry's side for later in the story, so that Harry has support from... (read more)

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr140

So Harry is, in effect, an AI created by Voldemort, but one that developed an unintended value system and so turned on its creator?

Harry as Unfriendly AI. (Unfriendly from Voldemort's point of view, anyway.) Nice.

Reply
6glumph
The destruction of that piece was crucial. I don't believe that it ever reunited with the rest of Voldemort's soul.
2Joshua Hobbes
This doesn't account for "the power the dark lord knows not" does it, though?
8Daniel_Starr
Right, that's not yet obvious. At least not to me! We do know that Quirrellmort is consistently surprised by the extent to which Harry thinks like a nice person instead of a Dark Lord. So the "alien power" could be Harry's having more of a mind of his own than Quirrellmort expects of a Horcrux. The "alien power" could equally be that Harry can cast a 2.0 Patronus, and in general has access to certain kinds of feelings and thoughts (and their associated magics?) that Quirrelmort doesn't. Or I suppose it could be that Dad's rock is in fact the Philosopher's Stone.
6Daniel_Starr
I think that Harry's "alien power" is still unclear for the same reason that readers resisted identifying MoR!Quirrell as Voldemort. The author has so much fun writing Quirrellmort-the-clever that he has great difficulty writing Quirrellmort-the-flawed. The only flaw in Quirrellmort that the author's actually shown is Quirrellmort's nonbelief in goodness. The backstory suggests that Voldemort had serious problems beyond mere cynicism. But there's a big difference between "the story asserts" and "the story demonstrates". (I'm using "flawed" here in the sense of "make choices that work out badly", not "make choices that would make us readers uncomfortable." That is, "flawed" as relevant to "power", not "flawed" as relevant to "approval".) Although it's possible that Quirrellmort is deliberately meant to be much more clearheaded than Voldemort.
[-]Vaniver250

Harry is not so clever: why did he think that telling Malfoy "this is a plot, you know it's a plot" would make it not a good idea for Malfoy to commit overkill in defending his son? The point of vengeance is deterrence, and the crack of "well, it might not have been Hermione" is not a good crack to have in your deterrence. Dumbledore even tells Harry as much. And then, to top it off, Harry threatens Malfoy.

What Harry should have done: talked to Malfoy beforehand (why didn't he?). Given that didn't happen, told Malfoy "I have information that is relevant to the attack, which I think you should know but should not be public yet, as it might diminish your capacity for vengeance for this to be known publicly."

Then, in private, Harry has a conversation with Lucius where Lucius doesn't need to play to the crowd, informing Lucius of his expectation of the plot, his respect for Draco, and his vow to punish the murderer of Narcissa, and then Lucius walks back out and asks that the trial be finished in a week.

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr160

Even if Harry couldn't get access to Lucius in private, he could have made a much better public proposal.

"Hermione was not your family's true enemy, as you and I both know. To you, she is nothing but a pawn symbolizing the foe you can't yet strike. But she has value to me. If you want the right to deliver her to Azkaban, so be it, but hold off on claiming that right, Lucius, and I will give you your real enemy. You can spend your anger on this one little child now. But then I will owe you nothing, and your enemy will laugh at you. Or take today's judgment but wait on executing it, call her a hostage for my promise between us, and I will redeem Hermione with one far more valuable to you - both for your revenge, and for the life and safety of your son."

Or something like that. It still probably wouldn't have worked, of course - Lucius does not trust Harrymort's intentions or power.

Reply
8Vaniver
As well, Lucius may have been behind the attack on Draco, to drive him away from Hermione (or ruin HP or so on). Giving Harry time to find the hand behind the dagger may not be in Lucius's best interests, but regardless of Lucius's complicity Harry should be trying to play to his stated goals, not his shame or fear.
1linkhyrule5
Presumably, he couldn't've talked to Lucius. And he's clearly too angry to meet in private right now.
5Vaniver
This post was detailing, for the audience, what Harry should have done. What Harry should do now is an entirely different matter.
1linkhyrule5
So I was I. Apparently, there was no opportunity to contact Lucius before the trial, and he was clearly too angry to meet in private during the events of the trial.
[-]mjr250

Okay, I don't really think this is how it'll go down - slightly too Dark Lordish. But the image was amusing, so here goes:

"It just happens that if Hermione doesn't walk, everyone but me will lose the ability to cast Patronus. Don't buy it? Oh, well, I'll just explain it to Hermione and she'll be able to testify under Veritaserum that I can do it."

Or, you know, have Hermione figure it out herself from Harry's note and do the blackmail herself.

Anyway, the blackmail potential for this is rather great, and I'd not be surprised to see it used in a more dire situation with more than Hermione on the line.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific170

It occurs to me that this would actually be a potentially successful (if politically costly) way to force the Ministry to replace Azkaban with a more humane Nurmengard-style prison. The mere fact that it's demonstrably possible for anyone to do this makes keeping Dementors around far less attractive.

Reply
[-]aleksiL140

What's the in-story justification for the dementor's presence anyway? I thought it seemed awfully convenient in case Harry decided to demonstrate his Patronus 2.0 but I couldn't figure out how it'd help enough.

I'd forgotten about the potential for ruining others' patronuses, though. That makes a lot more sense, especially considering he'd just reached into his dark side - possibly deeper than he'd ever willingly done before.

My guess: it wouldn't be enough at this point to just demonstrate a superior patronus or tell people about the possibility of ruining it for others. He tells the secret to EVERYONE present, leaving them at his mercy for protection. That gives him plenty of bargaining power and is dramatically Dark to boot. The political implications would be rather interesting, whether the Patroni could be returned by Obliviation or not.

Reply
4DanArmak
To protect Wizengamot members from dangerous criminals brought before them.
6Rejoyce
Combining with this idea: Harry openly speaks about Patronus 2.0, everyone's Patronuses fail (especially the sparrow and squirrel currently guarding the Dementor, everyone would see them fail), Harry casts his Patronus to protect Hermione (or she figures it out and casts her own, not that she would get the chance to but she might figure it out at least), and the Dementor starts sucking souls until Lucius retracts his sentence. Heck, maybe even threaten to spread Patronus 2.0 to the media, make wizarding Britain's animal Patronus population fail, then Aurors won't be able to keep their Patronuses up to guard Azkaban. So even if Hermione gets in, she wouldn't get her happiness sucked...
3bogdanb
Hermione is chained and I’d be very surprised if she still had her wand.
3hairyfigment
This might work, in combination with something that I see others have suggested. You need some way to get them to listen. This would take a lot, given that they're already recording the verdict. So: would the threat of destruction goad a dementor into breaking through two animal Patroni? Can Harry believe this would happen? (If so, coldly claiming that he can destroy Patronus ability might create enough doubt in the others' minds that it wouldn't matter if dementors follow expectations or not.) This plan does have shortcomings, like the threat of killing someone's mind (perhaps even Hermione's) and the risk of revealing what he did in Azkaban (at least to MoR!Dumbledore).
1Paulovsk
I don't get it. "It just happens that if Hermione doesn't walk, everyone but me will lose the ability to cast Patronus. Don't buy it? Oh, well, I'll just explain it to Hermione and she'll be able to testify under Veritaserum that I can do it." How exactly harry's ability (technique) to cast a strong patronus will interfere with the ability of the others?
[-]pedanterrific130

Harry opened his mouth, and then, as realization hit him, rapidly snapped his mouth shut again. Godric hadn't told anyone, nor had Rowena if she'd known; there might have been any number of wizards who'd figured it out and kept their mouths shut. You couldn't forget if you knew that was what you were trying to do; once you realized how it worked, the animal form of the Patronus Charm would never work for you again - and most wizards didn't have the right upbringing to turn on Dementors and destroy them -

Reply
[-]grautry180

I'm curious now...

We know that Obliviation doesn't erase everything - it erases memories but not every effect of the experience it erases. We've even seen it in story - Rianne Felthorne felt sad when looking at her "found" ruby. McGonnagall also hypothesized that Harry might have been abused(or otherwise experienced something awful) and then Obliviated.

Either way, I'm curious how this effect would interact with something like this.

If Harry told you the secret of the True Patronus(and you weren't the sort of person who could kill Dementors with that knowledge) and you Obliviated yourself, would that be enough to restore the capacity to use an animal Patronus?

Reply
5Paulovsk
Got it. But this part is not strong enough: "Oh, well, I'll just explain it to Hermione and she'll be able to testify under Veritaserum that I can do it." They could claim Hermione being able to testify under Veritaserum is only enough to prove that Harry could convince her, not that the thing itself was true.
3pedanterrific
It's more ethically dubious, but in theory he could do it to one person who could cast the Patronus Charm, have them testify under Veritaserum that they were no longer capable of it as a consequence of what Harry told them, then Obliviate them of the specifics- even if it doesn't restore their ability, at least it prevents them from affecting anyone else. Then the issue is proving they're not Occlumens. But it's not like I'm advocating this idea, or anything. ETA: Oh! He could do it to Amelia Bones!
1Anubhav
Or even Dumbledore.
[-]gwern230

PredictionBook registry - take one prediction a day to keep the hindsight bias away! - based on the speculation:

Harry's solution will be...

(These are not all mutually exclusive, and I didn't set down and make them all sum to 100%.)

Reply
[-]Spurlock190

Something about the last paragraph

his eyes looked at the rows of chairs, at every person and every thing within range of his vision, searching for any opportunity it could grasp

Makes me afraid he'll end up stabbing Lucius with the bones of a Hufflepuff.

Reply
6gwern
If I have to be massively wrong on my predictions and Harry really does resort to violence, there had darn well better be Hufflepuff-stabbing!
8DanArmak
My reasons for assigning ~0% to some of these: They would lock him away to protect the Dementors who are Britain's most powerful magical weapon in reserve in case of war with another magical nation. (Quoth Dumbledore.) Harry doesn't know that fact, so he can't offer it. Anyway, how would it help to reverse the judgement against Hermione? Can't use it to change what's already happened. Hermione has already given her testimony, and Harry didn't even listen so he wouldn't be in a good position to subtly modify it. And the Veritaserum on her is already wearing off, precluding further testimony. Harry and Hermione can't be both under the Cloak at once. People under the Cloak can still be caught by physically feeling around. The Aurors would stop them (certainly the one who wasn't under the Cloak at the time), and if they didn't, Hermione would be running around the building Cloaked but with no real way out. Wizengamot would have to vote to make the trial-by-combat's results binding (otherwise why should it reverse the standing Wizengamot vote to punish Hermione?) Lucius will ask them not to vote so, because Dumbledore would be Harry's champion, and so they won't. More generally, if Dumbledore could challenge Lucius to a duel every time a vote went against him, he'd have total control of the vote outcomes by virtue of being undefeatable in combat. And we know that's not the case. What would be the explanation presented for why Bella comes forward to confess, without implicating Quirrel? Just "Voldemort ordered me to do this and then Obliviated me"? Everyone would suspect Voldemort also false-memory-charmed Bella into believing she did it. And why would Voldemort sacrifice his most trusted and powerful lieutenant, whom he recently rescued at great risk, and not some smaller pawn? And why would Voldemort execute a plan to murder Draco or to frame Hermione in the first place? And how would Bella have gotten into Hogwarts without the wards detecting it, or Dumbledore's
7QuicklyStarfish
Regarding the Cloak, one possibility is that Harry could duplicate it using the Time Turner. (Harry[1] goes back in time, equips himself with Cloak[1], sneaks up to Harry[2] and take Cloak[2] from his pouch. He could use both cloaks to perform an impossible rescue, then return Cloak[2] to Harry[2]'s pouch.)
4Dreaded_Anomaly
I would be very surprised if Quirrell did not instruct Bellatrix to regain her Animagus form after she had sufficiently recovered from Azkaban. It would not be like him to go to all the trouble to present an alternative explanation for her escape but then fail to follow through.
2DanArmak
True. The real question is how much she has recovered.
4pedanterrific
They could in canon.
0DanArmak
But Harry and Bella couldn't both be under the Cloak at once in Azkaban. That's why Harry had to face the Dementors after he turned off his Patronus to evade Dumbledore. So MoR!verse differs from canon here. Edit: seems I'm wrong and the cloak is barely big enough for two children but not big enough for a child+adult. This is so in canon and presumably in MoR as well.
5pedanterrific
Bellatrix is forty years old. Even half-starved, she's a lot bigger than a twelve-year-old Hermione. (In canon, the Cloak got increasingly impractical for more than one person to use as time went on and the characters grew up.)
0DanArmak
You're right then, it's just my lack of knowledge of canon showing.
2Carinthium
This is a bit of a nitpick, but although ~0% is justified from an in-universe perspective, out-of-universe shouldn't you allow for the probability Elizier is planning one of these and has inadvertently introduced a massive plot hole?
0DanArmak
My p. estimate that Eliezer introduced a plot hole (that I pointed out above, or that someone else here has pointed out) is indeed slightly higher than ~0. However, since Eliezer reads this thread, I believe in such a case he would rewrite the next several chapters. My final estimate is still emotionally-indistinguishable from 0.
2AspiringKnitter
In canon, they thought they heard Buckbeak die, too. It could already be that Hermione gave altered testimony and Harry isn't aware of it because he didn't hear what she said because he wasn't listening. In fact, that makes sense.
0DanArmak
But since that altered testimony hasn't swayed the vote in her favor, why alter it in the first place?
0AspiringKnitter
Well... you know, this actually wasn't my idea and I'm not sure it would actually work, but playing devil's advocate here... ...anybody notice that Hermione's testimony contradicted itself? No; if they had, it would already have mattered. ...anybody notice that Hermione knew something she shouldn't at her age? No; she reads too much. ...anybody notice that Hermione knew something she shouldn't about Important Player In This Game? For instance, being able to mention what Voldemort looked like. It could be a subtle reference that Harry would have to point out because it flew under the radar. But it would really hurt Harry's relationship with Lucius. ...hey, notice how Hermione didn't know something Hermione should have known? It'd have to be subtle, but maybe if she mentioned uncertainty about something she should have known, it could do something... Well, I don't know. Eliezer's got me stumped this time.
0DanArmak
Harry didn't listen, and Harry is coming up with a suggestion next week. (Or in a few seconds, depending on your POV.) So this can't be relevant to that solution. So unless Harry's solution will fail, this altered-testimony thing should not exist.
1AspiringKnitter
But it can be. Harry knows what the altered testimony will be because he just decided on how to alter it. He comments on the oddity, then goes back in time and causes it. Just like when he asked for a teacher's help when Draco was torturing him. Causality is screwy in this universe, isn't it?
0DanArmak
It's possible. But he'd be risking someone flatly contradicting him the moment he made his statement about the testimony - "no, you didn't listen correctly, she didn't really say that". And afterwards, of course, there's no point for him to go back in time because he's received evidence that she did not in fact testify as he wished. Your scheme would work a lot better if he'd just listened to her testimony. Then he would know what he had to go back in time to cause, regardless of the way he used her testimony now. (grin)
0AspiringKnitter
He would risk it the same way he risked not actually being found by a teacher. Sure, that would be the smarter thing to do, but then it wouldn't come as a surprise to the audience. This way it gives us and Harry a puzzle.
2gwern
And Harry doesn't yet know what has already happened - he wasn't listening.
1DanArmak
But whatever happened has already caused the Wizengamot to find her guilty and vote to sentence her to Azkaban.
1gwern
Yes, but the Wizengamot is stupid and Dumbledore etc wouldn't be listening for changes; all Harry needs is one clear contradiction or impossibility. (What is it? Dunno.)
5glumph
Except that the Wizengamot is stupid. They might not care that Hermoine's testimony is inconsistent, or they might put it down to bad memory.
1DanArmak
OK, but he hasn't listened and hasn't caught this contradiction, and nobody else has, either. So he won't go back to plant anything. And if he did, it would just raise a huge question of why her testimony differed in an important respect from the testimony she had given a day before on the same subject, also under Veritaserum.
8mjr
Indeed, I was thinking destroy the Dementor as a show of force and threaten with challenging Draco to a duel to the death (I'm presuming he can do that as a Noble House). For, I don't know, willingly participating in a travesty of justice against a friend of Harry's or whatever. Close enough to a trial by combat, which also is presumably possible in this "justice" system, so yeah, maybe that after the show of force. I'm still slightly rooting for Draco to intervene, though. Slightly. Edit: Oh yeah, that torture thing. Even if Draco has been wiped of it and it's thus unprovable (aside from being not sufficient debt to cancel Hermione's supposed debt), the claim would probably be sufficient grounds for such duel.
1DanArmak
I'm doubting he can do that, practically, as a student in Hogwarts.
3tadrinth
Here's another idea: Draco uses his Patronus to tell the assembly he forgives the blood debt. Harry can use his own Patronus to beg Draco to do this.
7DanArmak
Draco doesn't have authority to forgive it on his own. The blood debt is said to be owned to the House of Malfoy, and Lucius is Lord of that House, and Draco is a minor. Besides, Draco would never antagonize and publicly embarrass his father that way. Draco is also very angry at Hermione himself, now.
1ajuc
I'd say Harry would trade with Lucius - Harry would testify under Veritaserum that Dumbledore confesed to Him, that he burned Narcissa. In exchange Lucius would let Hermione free. Harry don't know if Dumbledore burned Narcissa, but probably can beat Veritaserum (according to Quirell), and with his evil side enabled he can risk trying it. Similiar to "make Dumbledore turn himself in", but Dumbledore had chance to do that, and declined, and I don't know if Harry can blackmail Dumbledore serioulsy enough for this. But Harry don't need to blackmail Dumbledore.
1bogdanb
I thought you couldn’t change the past with a Time-turner.
4mjr
Harry didn't pay much attention to the testimony after the beginning, thus the timeline doesn't have to change if he goes back to make sure it contains some new False Memoried tidbits, if he can get someone to do the charm. But I don't think there's been much indication that he can override his Time Turner limitations by himself and there may be little time left to try and get someone to do it for him before Hermione is hauled off. Edit: Silly me, he could just decide what to make her say later and do a quick check from McGonagall if they were included (thus checking if he will manage to go back to do the deed) and go from there. But it'd be difficult to insert subtle enough bits to make a difference only when lampshaded by Harry afterward (since many others presumably listened to the whole testimony already without noticing). Not impossible though. [Re-edited for semi-clarity...]
0DSimon
He could alter Hermione's testimony in a way that's contradicted by new evidence that hasn't yet been presented.
0Alsadius
I think the probabilities work out roughly as follows: * 50% Malfoy's Imperius debt. * 20% nothing anyone here has thought of * 10% Something involving the true Patronus(Hermione casting it, etc.) * 10% all the other wacky theories proposed combined * 10% Harry fails and Hermione goes to Azkaban. I realize that this looks like a list designed to make me not look like too much of an idiot no matter what the result is, but I am not particularly confident, so I'll leave my error bars wide.
[-]DanArmak230

Suggestion: Harry (/Dumbledore) run some more almost-successful assassination attempts against Draco, while Hermione is in custody. That should suggest to Lucius and the Wizengamot that Hermione was being controlled. Bonus points for appearing to rescue Draco from said attempts. Bonus points for plausible attempts against Lucius himself. Extra bonus points for suggesting to Lucius a better explanation for the continuing attempts than the true one.

Reply
[-]Nominull140

Among other things, this runs into the same issue as pretending to defeat Voldemort - there's an actual criminal out there who actually tried to kill Draco, or frame Hermione, or something more obscure than either, and any playacting would be extremely premature until they know what's actually going on.

Reply
5Joshua Hobbes
That... sounds like Harry's style. So he'd need to be in the trial when it happens. Then someone storms into the chambers and tells Lucius there's been another attack, and Harry smirks inwardly.
[-]buybuydandavis140

Time Turner.

EDIT: On the other hand, if people know you have a time turner, then you have to work extra hard to establish an alibi.

EDIT Again: But then, with Polyjuice Potion, how could anyone ever have an alibi? Ehhh, maybe it's time for more suspension of belief.

Reply
1Sheaman3773
It's expensive, difficult to make, and Magical Britain's investigative process is pathetic. Given that a Veritaserum-given accusation and confession are considered conclusive even with known counters and a number of mind-altering spells widely taught, they most likely consider polyjuice too unlikely to bother worrying about in the vast majority of cases.
0buybuydandavis
Polyjuice potion? I know they say it's hard to make, but 3 second years managed it in canon. Did EY make a point of making it particularly harder to make than in canon?
0pengvado
Maybe not harder, but more dangerous. 2 second years managed in canon, and the 3rd messed up and got turned into a catgirl. HPMOR chapter 78 has a reference to that, except this time the catgirl transformation is permanent.
2Jello_Raptor
... Can we get the weasly brothers to do it? Also if Harry is taken off campus for the trail wouldn't that be at odds with Dumbledore's intention to keep him safe?
7DanArmak
In Dumbledore's personal presence he's safe enough. Especially since Dumbledore now thinks that Voldermort is in Hogwarts.
2glumph
But where will Draco be on the day of the trial? If he won't still be in St. Mungo's then he might be at Malfoy Manor, which, I assume, is rather secure. (It would be a problem for Harry if not for Dumbledore.)
6DanArmak
Well, what is Harry for if not thinking up solutions to "impossible" problems? Is this any harder than escaping Azkaban? People have already come up with ways to attack Malfoy Manor (transform antimatter), now we just have to attack and fail - how much harder could that be? :-)
[-]Daniel_Starr220

The author's clues are pushing in two different directions. "Taboo tradeoffs" in the title, and that Harry's Dark side is delivering the solution, implies an answer that is morally unnerving or at least cold-blooded.

The author's line about Harry shifting from seeing the Wizengamot voters as "wallpaper" to seeing individuals with agency, "PCs", and the line about remembering the laws of magical Britain, implies an answer that involves the incentives and 'rules of the game' of the other Wizengamot members besides Lucius and Dumbledore.

None of the solutions I've seen (let alone the few I've thought of) seem both Dark/taboo and social/voters-are-PCs.

Harry calling in the (nominally) Imperiused voters' debts: clever, invokes customs of magical Britain, makes the voters PCs rather than wallpaper, but not very Dark or taboo.

Harry threatens the crowd with the Dementor somehow, or browbeats Dumbledore into ruining his reputation: Dark/taboo, but doesn't invoke the customs of magical Britain or treat the other Wizengamot voters as PCs.

Is there a solution that both invokes magical Britain's laws / makes PCs of the voters and involves some alarmingly Dark/taboo move or trade by Harry?

Boy-Who-Lived marries Draco Malfoy?

Reply
6WrongBot
Harry could destroy his own reputation in order to save Hermione, by (for example) threatening to forever abandon Wizarding Britain. He is a beloved celebrity, after all, and it would be bad press for the Wizengamot if the Boy-Who-Lived defected to France. Not sure how likely his dark side is to go for a self-sacrificing ploy, though.
975th
Wizarding Britain doesn't know that there's a Dark Lord still out there; it doesn't know that they still need Harry Potter as anything other than a celebrity, and for him to make such a threat would appear only as the height of vanity.
6wedrifid
Shouldn't they take that for granted already? I mean obviously he's going to have absolutely no remaining loyalty to the state - or at least the power structure - that did that to him. They should all expect to die whenever Harry finds it convenient to overthrow them. Or is that just what I would do? (Any sane politician who was planning to make that sort of move against a potential emergent power like Harry would also see to it that they were killed, crippled or framed as a matter of course. You don't go around recklessly making enemies and leaving them free to gather power.)
[-]gwern170

"...Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge."

--Machiavelli

Reply
2DanArmak
Apart from Dumbledore and Lucius, none of them are likely to take an 11-yo child and his promises of enmity and revenge at all seriously. "Enough talk, he'll be late for his classes." And even if he might become a political counter of some significance in a decade, or a few decades, they wouldn't expect him to hold a grudge that long - normal children don't often do that.
2glumph
While Dumbledore and Lucius and other major figures might be sane, I'm not sure if we're supposed to take the majority of the Wizengamot to be anything other than, in Harry's words, "stupid, corrupt, and evil."
4DanArmak
On the same kind of criteria, you might expect the majority of all wizards and indeed all humans to be stupid, corrupt, and evil-when-given-great-power. It's a Quirrel kind of thought. Which doesn't make it untrue.
6linkhyrule5
Dark side doesn't care about consequences - I believe someone likened it to an UFAI.
3SkyDK
I disagree. This is a possible, but weak solution whereto the probability calculation of good Bayesian says that it doesn't stand a good chance of succeeding compared to the cost. Right now Harry is not in an impressive social situation. Besides being the Boy-Who-Lived he's done nothing, and in this particular context he has not scored an awful lot of points.
5Alsadius
The taboo tradeoff is presumably Lucius being asked to trade off his chance at revenge.
0malthrin
Agreed. I'm not sure why everyone's so fixated on a tradeoff by Harry.
3drnickbone
Much worse, Harry sacrifices Hermione to achieve a higher level of utility (probably something involving 3^^^3). Horrible thought, but his dark side could do it, and he's just gone to the dark side for a solution.
4wedrifid
That isn't a scary thought at all. In fact, in the absence of a clever solution it is the best option available. Sometimes you just have to lose because there is no real option. If it wasn't in a story with Harry as the protagonist it would almost certainly be best to not start a war with the entire power structure to try to save her. Well, not yet. Let Hermione go. Go research magic. Take over the world. Rescue Hermione. Use advanced magic and an FAI to heal the damage done to Hermione.
2ajuc
Harry promises Lucius to speak under Veritaserum, that Dumbledore confesed to Harry, that he burned Narcisa. Harry is occlumens or almost occlumens, so he can beat Veritaserum, but everybody don't know it. Lucius Malfoy has his revenge, and his son, so he let Hermione free. Dumbledore loses, and maybe everything is lost, but Hermione is free. That's taboo tradeoff.
2Normal_Anomaly
Dumbledore knows Harry is an Occlumens, and he would say as much and have it independently verified.
[-]Daniel_Starr210

Harry testifies: "Voldemort did it all. He made me watch with the Imperius curse -- just like when he made me help rescue Bellatrix Black."

Harry provides details of the Bellatrix rescue that only a participant would know. His accuracy can be verified by Azkaban Security Director Amelia Bones, who just happens to be present in the Wizengamot.

Harry's knowledge of the Bellatrix rescue proves the villain who Imperiused him was really Voldemort. Who else would rescue Bellatrix?

If anyone expresses doubts about Harry's super-Patronus, Harry immediately takes the excuse to annihilate a Dementor, one of which also just happens to be present in the Wizengamot.

Harry's Occlumency lets him lie through the Veritaserum about being Imperiused and witnessing poor Hermione being framed by Voldemort. He likewise lies that "Voldemort" (not Quirrell) took him to rescue Bellatrix.

Harry explains that seeing Hermione about to be condemned to Azkaban gave him the strength to finally break free of Voldemort's Imperius curse and tell everyone the truth. (Alternately, Obliviation and a Pensieve Harry wasn't supposed to find.)

Hermione is deemed innocent. Voldemort is acknowledged back in t... (read more)

Reply
2Alsadius
Well you've at least managed a "confess" possibility that isn't completely insane, which is rather a feat. Of course, Dumbledore and some others know about the Occlumency thing, which means that there's a rather gaping hole in the explanation. Also, he took months to come forward, which is sketchy, and he said not five minutes earlier that he didn't know whose plot it was. Also, everyone thinks Voldemort is dead, and I didn't think an Imperius could be broken in the HP universe. Still, it's an improvement on that line of thought.
0pedanterrific
I don't know about MoR, but canonically Harry is dang near immune to the Imperius. For no particular reason, either- he just has an unusually strong will.
0Nominull
Well a Killing Curse can't be survived, either. Harry Potter has some precedent for resisting Voldemort's irresistible magics.
0Sheaman3773
He broke Barty Crouch Jr.'s Imperius curse as well.
2buybuydandavis
I don't agree with your general thesis, but this line from Harry would be double plus ironic with Lucius believing that Harry is Voldemort.
0Daniel_Starr
Minor variant: "I did it all. Voldemort made me, with the Imperius curse -- just like when he made me help rescue Bellatrix Black." Advantages: * requires Harry to make up fewer details about Voldemort's behavior (Harry just claims Voldemort Imperiused Harry with his orders regarding Hermione and then disappeared). * incredibly dramatic first line for chapter. "I did it! I'm guilty!" Readers spend several paragraphs wondering if Harry is actually setting himself up to go to Azkaban in Hermione's place. Disadvantage: * requires Harry to claim that the Imperius curse gave him spell expertise he otherwise doesn't have (Obliviate and the False Memory Charm). I personally dislike the Imperius "powerup", but it's in canon so Harry could certainly know about it in the fic. Aside from that objection this is an even more dramatic variant.
0DanArmak
Harry can defeat Veritaserum (maybe), but definitely can't lie to a Legilemens - and the Wizengamot officially uses one to interrogate witnesses. Maybe they wouldn't do it on the spot, for whatever reason, but they would get to shortly, because this is very serious business. And if they saw in Harry's mind that he lied, they'd just interrogate him very thoroughly and then never listen to him speak freely.
4pedanterrific
However, it's likely that Lucius believes Harry is a perfect Occlumens, which means he would fight to block a Legilimency examination.
2DanArmak
Suppose enough people disbelieve Lucius, or just oppose him if he's keeping his reasoning secret. Harry is the one coming forward asking to testify, so they decide to let him. But when testifying before the Wizengamot, standard procedure is to use a Legilemens. They even used one on Hermione, and no-one thinks she's any kind of Occlumens at all. So an Occlumens would be used, and would report that Harry is lying. There's no way Daniel_Starr's plan for Harry would work - whether they let him testify or not - unless he is a perfect Occlumens, and I don't believe that even of his dark side, it's not been sufficiently foreshadowed. (Also, Eliezer just wrote in the A/N that in text fiction, a protagonist can't just power-up and gain new abilities during a crisis, because it makes for poor storytelling; he has to solve the crisis using abilities he already has.)
9pedanterrific
I don't believe this is correct. They only bothered to use a Legilimens on the direct request of the Chief Warlock; Veritaserum is normally considered sufficient.
0DanArmak
Good point. It's still possible that someone will request a Legilemens if Harry testifies, so such plans are risky.
5Daniel_Starr
Dumbledore won't ask for a Legilimens, because he'll trust Harry. Lucius won't, because he believes Harry is Voldemort and a perfect Occlumens. And everybody else will follow Dumbledore and Lucius' lead on the matter. Politicians hate taking risks and being caught out. Subordinate politicians really hate taking risks and being caught out.
0clgroft
Unless he's a perfect Occlumens by now.
4Joshua Hobbes
Or rather, unless his really really dark side is. Which I find quite plausible, really.
0Manfred
Nah, "what use is a mysterious dark side that doesn't even give him super powers?"
[-]ahartell110

After almost a month of work, and more on a whim than any real hunch, Harry had decided to make himself coldly angry and then try the book's Occlumency exercises again. At that point he'd mostly given up hope on that sort of thing, but it had still seemed worth a quick try -

He'd run through all the book's hardest exercises in two hours, and the next day he'd gone and told Professor Quirrell he was ready.

His dark side, it had turned out, was very, very good at pretending to be other people.

Chapter 27

Reply
0Baughn
Which, to clarify, it turned out that it wasn't. Quirrel saw right through it.
2Sheaman3773
Do you mean Mr. Bester? It was good at pretending to be other people, he just didn't know enough to make sure that the other person was the only one that Legilimens saw when reading his mind.
0Baughn
I don't remember at this point which one it was, but the GGP text suggests Quirrel was in fact the one to test him then. As for the mechanics of it - you may be right, I mostly recall that it didn't actually work.
0Joshua Hobbes
[-]iceman210

The Joker: I took Gotham's white knight and I brought him down to our level. It wasn't hard. You see, madness, as you know, is like gravity. All it takes is a little push!

-- The Dark Knight

The narrative that we, the readers, are supposed to believe at this point goes like this: Hermione was given information during her little rendezvous with H+C, giving her some information that made her think that Snape and the Malfoys had it in for her, that the duel didn't happen, and H+C (presumably Quirrell) obliviated her memory of their first meeting afterwards.

Professor Quirrell has made numerous statements doubting Hermione's goodness. For example: "She is young, and to make a show of kindness costs her little." (60) Being Quirrell, he has most likely predicted Harry's sentiment on the matter: "But 3 out of 40 subjects had refused to participate all the way to the end. The Hermiones. They did exist, in the world, the people who wouldn't fire a Simple Strike Hex at a fellow student even if the Defense Professor ordered them to do it." (63)

I would like to advance the hypothesis that Hermione actually did attempt to kill Draco. Yes, she had been set up to stew in her p... (read more)

Reply
[-]pedanterrific210

I don't have a clue why Dumbledore would be involved in this case, but... Bellatrix is Narcissa's sister. And it occurs to me that a) Bella would be perfectly capable of burning her sister to death for basically any reason at all and b) Harry would be extremely reluctant to destroy her even if he knew she did it.

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr230

Oh, thank you, that's it, that's the answer: Bellatrix is Narcissa's sister, and of course Lucius would be more comfortable blaming Dumbledore than Bellatrix, not only for family reasons but for fear of Voldemort.

Plus, consider the Law of Dramatic Efficiency: Bellatrix is one of the few people we've met who would fully trigger Harry's oath (to take Narcissa's killer as an enemy) yet Harry wouldn't want to kill. Because Bellatrix wasn't "tricked" into killing Narcissa. Brainwashed, yes, but not tricked.

Bellatrix meets all the conditions for Narcissa's killer:

  1. If it's not Dumbledore, it has to be someone Lucius would rather not name to Draco. Bellatrix: sister-in-law and Voldemort's chief lieutenant.

  2. It has to be someone Lucius has been in no position to take revenge on in the intervening years. Bellatrix: in Azkaban.

  3. It ought, dramatically, to be someone within the oath yet very uncomfortable for Harry to go after. Bellatrix: in Harry's mind, brainwashed into her evil, but not tricked into the murder of Narcissa.

So Bellatrix fits perfectly. Lucius blames Dumbledore, knowing Draco won't trust Dumbledore claiming the contrary, and knowing how dangerous it would be for ... (read more)

Reply
[-]pedanterrific170

If this is true, I'm looking forward to the inevitable Draco+Neville team-up.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific100

Oh, I just realized - this makes Lucius' reaction to Harrymort make much more sense. Previously I was confused as to why he wasn't either ingratiating or fearful, but instead was all "my son is the last worthwhile thing I have in the world" complete with threats of vengeance. Of course he would react like that if this had happened.

Reply
1bogdanb
It’s a very nice theory, but Dumbledore’s (and the other characters’) reactions to Lucius proposing the deal don’t quite seem to match. Lucius also seems sincere about considering it a real blood debt from Dumbledore comparable to an attempt on his son, I don’t think he’s a high-level enough player to have even the narrator not mention anything suspicious about it if he were faking it.
[-]DanArmak200

Just call him Heh.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific190

Pretty sure Amelia Bones was a Hufflepuff.

Reply
0TobyBartels
The Wikia infers this from the tendency of house membership to run in families (and that her niece is a Hufflepuff, of course).
[-]ArisKatsaris190

Floo powder requires a fireplace connected to the Ministry-supervised system. It's meant to be secure enough that it can connect locations where wards would prevent you from just Apparating there (like people's homes and Hogwarts)
Apparation requires being an licenced wizard and (in HPMoR atleast) you can only visit places where you've already been.
Portkeys can take you to new locations, and only need expertise in their creation, not their usage, but each portkey can only take you to a specific location.

The above are differences enough that you can see why different forms of transportation would be preferable under different scenarios.

Reply
[-]LucasSloan180

Point in favor of this all being a plot by Quirrell to cause Harry to be more willing to overthrow the ministry:

But by then he'd already declared war on the country of magical Britain, and the idea of other people calling him a Dark Lord no longer seemed important one way or another.

ETA: Evidence this is the result of Quirrell's plotting at all:

Harry's mind flashed back to another day of horror, and even though Harry had been on the verge of writing off Lord Voldemort's continued existence as the senility of an old wizard, it suddenly seemed horribly and uniquely plausible that the entity who'd Memory-Charmed Hermione was the very same mind that had - made use of - Bellatrix Black. The two events had a certain signature in common. To choose that this should happen, plan for this to happen - it would take more than evil, it would take emptiness.

Reply
8DanArmak
Harry is naive. Why not assume that many people can be this non-empathetic? It's a useful quality to have, after all.
2hairyfigment
Because it also requires competence? I don't actually know what a world with many super-competent villains would look like, but I'm guessing 'Not like this'.
8MarkusRamikin
I'm trying to figure out what the heck that even means. I sure hope Harry doesn't make a habit of deducing plot points - such as "Voldemort did it" here - from such vague moralipsychologising.
[-]Daniel_Starr140

Harry's suggesting that Voldemort's tactics involve not just hate but an incredible degree of cynicism.

Both "Make Bella love you despairingly, on purpose" and "Mess with Hermione's brain intimately over a long period of time" reflect a person who can get to know people closely and accurately and yet not care about them at all.

A lot of evil comes from people doing bad things to people they don't bother to think about in the first place. Voldemort clearly took the trouble to get to know Bellatrix and (somewhat) Hermione rather well - solely for the purposes of undermining them.

Some police trained as hostage-situation snipers find they can't actually pull the trigger on real criminals, because they watch them so long and so closely they empathize with them. Draco Malfoy, in the fic, was coming to empathize with Hermione Granger.

Harry is observing that Voldemort seems to be immune to natural empathy, and that creeps him out.

(Agree that Harry having "Voldemort plot detection powers" as a general rule would be bizarre.)

Reply
2razor11
Harry doesn't know whether whoever framed Hermione knew her closely or not. He knew that her mind was probably tampered with on several different occasions, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the criminal interacted with her on a regular basis, or enough to empathize with her. Otherwise I think he would have considered Quirell as a lead suspect early on.
2MarkusRamikin
Good reply. I'll note, however, that to me the word "evil" means what you're talking about. If we're talking about "evil' as a character trait, that is, someone being an evil person. When you say "A lot of evil comes from people doing bad things to people they don't bother to think about in the first place", I assume you're talking about "evil" as in "harm done", which is not the same thing.
[-]buybuydandavis180

Why are we assuming that Quirrelmort is on the up and up about wanting Harry to be the next Dark Lord?

Isn't that exactly the story you'd give a young prodigy with delusions of godhood to manipulate him, particularly if you wanted to set him against the establishment? Put Hermione in harms way, arrange to have her sent to Azkaban, where you've already arranged to have Harry rescue Bellatrix, egg Harry on to rescue her, as if he needed any egging on, then try to steal the Sorcerer's Stone while everyone is away at Azkaban.

Regardless on the details of Hermione's trial plays out, it would be a really interesting mind fuck to Harry, to find out that Quirrell was completely manipulating Harry's Messiah Complex from day one so he could someday use him as a distraction, and that all of Harry's childish science fiction fantasizing are seen by Quirrellmort as just that - childish.

And Dumbledore seems worse than Harry about taking science fiction/fantasy novels as a way to model real life.

And guess what? To the extent that we are lapping up this story, we are too. A mind fuck for Harry, Dumbledore, and us. And I can't say that we wouldn't have it coming.

Years ago, I read Point Counterpoint... (read more)

Reply
2Daniel_Starr
Presumably if Quirrell thought he could take over the world on his own he'd have done so, and not wasted time playing a petty game to amuse himself with one boy wizard. But you're right that "I notice I am confused" about the relationship between Voldemort, Quirrell's current mind, and Harry's mind. If Quirrell's mind is a copy of Voldemort, and if he believes Harry's mind is also a copy of Voldemort, what is Quirrell's ultimate intent for Harry? To overwrite him? To merge with him? Or merely to train him back into himself? And if Dumbledore knows as much or almost as much about Horcruxes as Quirrell, does Dumbledore also know or suspect that Harry contains a piece of Voldemort's mind?
4buybuydandavis
If Quirrellmort gets the Stone, he'll come back much stronger than he ever was. That's not a petty gain.
8Daniel_Starr
You're right, the Stone would be worth it. But if you know or expect the Stone to be in Hogwarts, then why take the awful risk of breaking out Bellatrix Black? If you were found out, you'd lose your chance to continue casing Hogwarts for the Stone. Come to think of it, why did Quirrellmort break out Bellatrix before his other plans were complete? Wasn't that awfully risky? What does Bellatrix offer that is so urgently needed? (Possible answer: Quirrellmort is decaying fast.)
8buybuydandavis
Bellatrix is a puzzle. Possible that he was actually in love with her, and that all the supposed torture was false memory charmed into her? I can't quite see how it would work, but my guess is that EY is a soppy old romantic at heart, so I wouldn't be surprised if somehow the relation between Bellatrix and Voldemort was transfigured. Then again, maybe it wasn't Bellatrix at all. She was just being used again. As DanArmak implies, maybe Quirrell is just driving a wedge between Harry and The Man. That's certainly useful, and plays into the current storyline of Hermione possibly going there. That was my first thought. Wouldn't that be a nice start to manipulate Harry into the Dark Side, a la the consistency bias? Also, it let Harry see first hand the torture, further alienating him from The Man. And if Hermione gets sent up, I can't see Harry doing nothing about that, after liberating Bellatrix. Save Bellatrix and let Hermione rot? That doesn't seem likely. However, didn't Hat and Cloak press Hermione that Harry would eventually sacrifice her for some higher goal? Somebody did that. Kind of a replay of Hermione looking to Dumbledore for justice, but receiving it from Quirrell instead. Maybe she gets disillusioned with Harry this time, and Quirrell rights the balance again? Maybe he wants to turn Hermione to the Dark Side? The Bellatrix thing is a really good point, though. But it leads me to something else interesting - Dementors. Maybe rescuing Bellatrix was just a diversion from the true point - seeing what Harry could do about Dementors. Defeating Death is central to Harry, Voldemort, and EY. Harry was extra sensitive to Dementors. Quirrell too. He asked for them at Hogwarts. He saved Harry from them. But Hermione said the Dementor's told her that Quirrell wanted the Dementors to eat Harry. And the Dementor told Quirrell that he knew him, and would hunt him down. Quirrell talked about "someone" attempting to destroy a Dementor. Death Eaters? A little joke fro
1DanArmak
Charmed by someone other than Voldemort, I presume, after his death, and really they were two happy lovers all along? But then others (Lucius, Draco through him, etc) would have had quite different memories of the Voldemort-Bella relationship, and Harry would ventually hear about it when she became a popular subject of discourse after escaping from Azkaban. Everyone can't be charmed about this matter.
2DanArmak
Maybe just to prime Harry with Azkaban, to drive a wedge between him and all magical authority that supports it, to prepare him to go Dark, and to be absolutely certain he'd act in a hurry if, say, Hermione was imprisoned there. The other major effect of the Azkaban arc was to convince Dumbledore, and through him Madam Bones who commands the Aurors, that Voldemort has returned. While Dumbledore thinks Voldemort is around, he's less likely to suspect or investigate Quirrel as the cause of any new disasters; and he also prohibits Harry from leaving Hogwarts, which drives Harry to Quirrel for help if he must leave - such as, again, to help Hermione. Besides, Quirrel may be right when he says he didn't think the Azkaban breakout was such a big risk (of discovery), he just didn't anticipate Harry interfering against orders and then stunning him due to the resonance.
1Grognor
Regardless of whether it was awfully risky, I don't think Quirrell thought it was risky. "My planss not in habit of failing."
[-]Jello_Raptor180

Snape's plotting here is interesting, but I'm not sure what he is actually trying to accomplish.

Quick rundown of what we know:

  1. Snape was the one who sent Hermione the notes on where to find bullies.
  2. Snape destroyed those notes when asked to look for them.
  3. He went through great efforts to obliviate everyone at SPHEW's final battle.
  4. Snape had a conversation with Quirrel where he had his ass handed to him. (either he was stupid when dealing with Quirrel, or wanted Quirrel to think he was stupid)
  5. He is probably working outside of Dumbledore's ordersl, and is definitely hiding things from Dumbledore.
  6. After the SPHEW girls kept on winning he stopped the Slytherin bullies from advancing any farther.

So I suspect a few things:

  1. Snape was the one who was forcing the repeated escalation of the SPHEW situation
  2. Snape is actually working to help Harry somehow. (Because of his love for Lily)
  3. Snape is not nearly so biased against muggleborns as he pretends to be. (Remember Lily was a muggleborn)
  4. Snape is trying to restore the reputation of Slytherin house in much the same way as Harry. (He's cutting down on bullying and is, in a way consistant with his character, making the hatred of mu
... (read more)
Reply
[-]loserthree250

I don't believe Snape values his love for Lily, past or present. I believe Snape is scheming to his own ends and by his own mercilessly practical means. He's not the best at it, but he's left the chump train.

Snape forced the escalation in order to get justification to do exactly what he did at the end of the first scene of chapter 75, where the following describes him admonishing the top Slytherin bullies:

"You will do nothing," hissed their Head of House. Severus Snape's face was enraged, when he spoke small spots of spittle flew from his mouth, further dotting his already-dirtied robes. "You fools have done enough! You have embarrassed my House - lost to first-years - now you speak of embroiling noble Lords of the Wizengamot in your pathetic childish squabbles? I shall deal with this matter. You will not embarrass this House again, you will not risk embarrassing this House again! You are done with fighting witches, and if I hear otherwise -"

Snape has cut the head off the Slytherin Bullying Machine, intending to see the machine fall apart without it. The non-Slytherin bullies were probably never that organized (fucking Gryffindors), and I suppose are mean... (read more)

Reply
6moridinamael
One interesting clue I noticed last night while re-reading HPMOR to my wife as a bed time story is that Snape is essentially ordered by Dumbledore to stop reading students' minds as a condition of his blackmail-agreement with Harry (Chapter 18), but we see later that Snape is clearly still reading minds without permission when he reads Alissa Cornfoot's mind while she is fantasizing about him (Chapter 28). Previously I hadn't thought that there was any real reason for that interlude in Chapter 28, but now I see that it tells us information about how Snape doesn't follow Dumbledore's orders.
8loserthree
I'm unsure that is an accurate description of the text. You are more or less right about chapter 18. First, Harry makes his demand regarding Snape: Then there is this corresponding line within the compromise Dumbledore offers: We don't observe this promise actually being made. And we aren't even assured of when it would be made. A pointlessly legalistic take on the terms could be that Snape will make that promise at some point in his life. But I think it's safe to say that the promise was made shortly thereafter. I also think it is plausible that it has been followed. The closing of chapter 28 may be addressed by another quote from chapter 18: Hormone-addled children are ill-equipped for subtly. I think the more telling thing from the scene in chapter 28 is that Snape directly rejected her instead of leaving her pining, as he had been left pining. Previously he regarded the pain of rejection as the worst possible thing. But after his conversation with HJPEV, and I guess some introspection or whatever, he understands his acceptance of that rejection was better than eternal uncertainty. (emphasis added as edit)
5matheist
I read this as meaning that Dumbledore's order that Snape stop reading minds is just to mollify Harry. Dumbledore reads students' minds (I argue here that Dumbledore reads the Weasley twins' minds), and hence doesn't actually care whether Snape does the same. Harry, of course, has no way of checking that Snape is following this order, so it's safe for Dumbledore to cross his fingers under the table, so to speak.
5loserthree
Dumbledore never promised to stop reading student's minds. Not int chapter 18 when he said Snape would make that promise or in chapter 20 when he is called on reading HJPEV's mind. Also, Dumbledore's offered compromise to HJPEV was this: It is not difficult to argue that the safety of some student, somewhere requires constant readings of the minds of the Weasley twins.
3ArisKatsaris
Agreed, but I thought it was heavily implied in Interlude with the Confessor that he had assigned Rianne Felthorne the task of assisting them.
[-]DanArmak170

I believe Snape's motivations are more personal than trying to help Slytherin House. He's remembering how he was bullied by James, and his conversation about the topic with Harry prompted him to devise this scheme to fight bullying today. He's basically looking for redemption, having perhaps abandoned his love for Lily after talking with Harry and also after the Interlude with the Confessor.

This explains why he's starting this scheme now, rather than as soon as he became Head of Slytherin.

He's hiding this from Dumbledore because Dumbledore explicitly acted against his plot: he tried to stop the SPHEW-bully fights, in the end by the drastic method of ordering Snape to disband them and publicly humiliate and punish Hermione. Dumbledore explained his actions and motivations several times to Harry.

Reply
1Jello_Raptor
Point, though wanting to curb bullying, and end the racism amounts to nearly the same thing as wanting to redeem Slytherin.
[-]DanArmak100

Not really. Bullying is House-neutral; Slytherin and Gryffindor both bully each other as well as random other students. Note the heavy non-Slytherin presence at the last bully battle, and note that James Potter was in Gryffindor. And Quirrelmort, who was (for the sake of argument) in Slytherin, spoke of how much he once hated bullies.

Reply
[-]75th140

Snape is over Lily. He's been coming to grips with losing his love for Lily ever since Harry gave Snape his (incorrect) explanation for Lily's treatment of him. The moment he kissed Rianne is the moment he finally decided to stop living and grieving for Lily and start living for himself.

The question is what it means for him to live for himself. Dumbledore's trust in Snape is based on his knowledge of Snape's undying love for Lily. If Dumbledore were to find out that that love no longer exists, he would (gently, perhaps) kick Snape out of the Fellowship. He would know that there was no longer any reason to trust him. And if Snape has gotten over Lily, he'll probably feel no real compulsion to help Harry in any particular way.

Quirrell, being a smarter Voldemort, knows what was driving Snape when he was working for Dumbledore, and he now knows that it's driving Snape no longer. That's why he had that little conversation with him in the woods; he knows that Snape is now a free agent who might once again be a blood purist loyal to Voldemort.

Voldemort would not likely welcome Snape back into his fold once Voldie reveals himself, but now that he knows Snape's loyalties are up for grabs, he won't hesitate to manipulate him and use him however he can until then.

Reply
8Anubhav
How?
[-]75th100

We're told so during their conversation in the woods.

No, there is only one person who holds so much power over you, and who would be most perturbed to find you executing any plot without his knowledge. Your true and hidden master, Albus Dumbledore."

"What?" hissed the Potions Master, the anger plain upon his face.

"But now, it seems, you are moving on your own; and so I find myself most intrigued as to what you could possibly be doing, and why."

Quirrell may not know about his love for Lily, but I consider that highly unlikely, since Snape apparently still asked Voldemort not to kill her. Quirrellmort would certainly have put two and two together by now.

But that passage explicitly tells us that Quirrell knows that Snape is no longer acting under Dumbledore's orders.

Reply
7buybuydandavis
And Snape is the Half-Blood Prince.
[-]matheist160

Lucius is a slytherin, and not stupid. What if he really does believe Hermione is a pawn? The question remains — whose pawn?

Lucius might believe Hermione is Dumbledore's pawn.

Lucius already believes D killed his wife, and so he would have no trouble believing Dumbledore is targeting his son. In fact, it would be to Dumbledore's advantage (so might think Lucius) to target Draco in such a way that D can avoid taking the blame. If D wanted to impose political costs on Lucius, one way he might do it is to have someone utterly beyond suspicion be found to have attacked Draco. Then Lucius would have to use up political capital to punish an innocent little girl.

If Lucius thinks this way, it would explain his willingness to punish Hermione to the extreme — she's Dumbledore's pawn, and so he's going to take her away in order to impose costs on Dumbledore. For Dumbledore to speak up for Hermione would reinforce the belief that she belongs to D.

What do we make of Harry Potter's comments, and Lucius's reaction to them, in this light (given that Lucius thinks Harry is the dark lord)? His "unheard sentences" would likely be along the lines of "No shit, sherlock!", followed by... (read more)

Reply
3Xachariah
My mental model of Lucius is here. The summary of it is that Lucius thinks that Harrymort has turned sides and is now psuedo-allied with Dumbledore. Lucius thinks he's just aligned himself on the weak side of a 2-on-1 secret war against the two strongest wizards alive, but he has no choice because they both want to destroy him.
0buybuydandavis
I see him gaining political capital by destroying the mudblood girl who publicly challenged and defeated his pureblood son. The purebloods in the WIzengamot were aching to abuse her.
[-]staticIP160

Dementor, do you know who I am? Just say yes or no.

Do you know what I'm capable of? Once again, yes or no.

Leave Hermione be. Do not approach her or tread upon her thoughts during her time in azkaban. Run along and tell your compatriots at azkaban. Now.

Hopefully albus's belief would be enough to bolster them even if they don't have a mind if their own. If they do have a mind of their own they can be threatened, and have been in the past.

Reply
[-]buybuydandavis160

How about, follow the money? Who gains?

Hermione, the girl who publicly humiliated Draco and the whole Pureblood cause, now owes a blood debt to Lucius Malfoy. Not only does he gain power over her, but by extension, over Harry, and further extension, to Dumbledore. All for the price of a very safe if monitored supposed attempt on Draco's life, which Draco likely would have volunteered for if given the opportunity.

Lucius has hit the jackpot, even if he didn't plan and orchestrate the whole thing. He can extract almost anything out of Harry in exchange for leniency for Hermione. It seems unlikely that the good Defense Professor would have orchestrated a plan which is entirely dependent for it's success on Lucius failing to take advantage of the situation - unless putting Harry in Lucius's debt was his goal.

Lucius personally has complete control of the outcome, and I'm surprised Harry hasn't considered contacting him yet.

Reply
3moritz
Right. And Lucius calls Snape his "valuable ally", so it's likely that Snape has done the dirty work for Lucius inside Hogwarts.
2Alsadius
Or Snape is just a good double agent.
3mjr
Indeed. Though I went a bit further (more likely than not too far ;) in the reviews: "Speculation time: Lucius did it. But plot thickens: Draco will intervene on Hermione's behalf, mostly on the basis of their remembered scenario being very implausible, as explained in the chapter. The Harry-Draco bond will strengthen. Just as Lucius intended, not being quite as inflexible as pictured in the discussion, and seeing that Draco will do quite well for himself as Harry's second. As a side benefit, he'll get the record to show that (according to the false memory) Draco won a straight duel against Hermione. (Almost nobody will think to doubt that part of the memory - Draco might, but will keep it to himself.)" Mr. Hat presumably can't be Lucius, though (that "only teachers can cast this sort of stuff here without being noticed" thing), so ve'd have to be just under his control, but that should be simple enough.
[-]ArisKatsaris150

But plot thickens: Draco will intervene on Hermione's behalf, mostly on the basis of their remembered scenario being very implausible, as explained in the chapter.

Only Hermione's supposed cold-blooded attempt to kill him is highly implausible, and Draco doesn't actually remember nor can testify to that.

The things that Draco remembers aren't actually significantly implausible: We know he challenged her to a duel to that very place, we know he considered himself quite likely to overpower her in that duel. Then all Draco knows of that night is that he was stunned in the back.

Draco does not even need to have been False-Memory charmed for any of the above - even if Hermione didn't actually go to the duel, a polyjuiced Quirrell could have taken her place.

Only Hermione needs to have been implanted with false memories.

Reply
2buybuydandavis
I like the Draco part, but the Lucius part seems a stretch to me. Lucius could have just stayed out of their way and let their bond grow, trusting to Draco to cozy up with a new power. Actually, it appears more likely to me that this is a plot by Lucius to turn Draco away from Harry by setting Hermione in opposition to Draco. But both Lucius and Draco are key to the resolution of this. Mr. Hat is the trick for any Lucius Did It theory. Off the top of my head, I can't find a satisfactory Mr. Hat for this scenario. Snapes seems the only possible candidate.
2Eponymuse
Assuming Quirrell is Voldemort, he presumably had years of access to Lucius' mind (if he regularly required Lucius to drop Occlumency barriers). At the very least, we can assume he has an excellent mental model of how Lucius behaves. The plot therefore doesn't seem like too great of risk for Quirrell, particularly when we consider that Lucius is about to discover Harry's progress in turning Draco. Quirrell can safely assume that Lucius will react in a way that will pull Draco and Harry apart when he discovers this, and will therefore be less inclined to trade Hermione for something of Harry's.
[-]David_Gerard160

It's an actually popular thing associated with LessWrong, and it's a good place for the comments. Putting the threads in the discussion section is hardly onerous. We could date them rather than number them, like the Open Threads.

Reply
2Grognor
True, but I can forsee clutter. (Ah, well,it sounds completely trivial when I put it into words like that.)
1David_Gerard
Discussion runs pretty fast, y'know ...
[-]lavalamp150

I think Harry already failed his bargaining attempt vs. Lucius, so for flow of story reasons I don't think he's going to call in his life debt, although that makes the most sense of the theories I've seen so far.

I think Harry will bargain with the dementor. "Dementor, if you and your ilk allow this girl to enter Azkaban, I will come and destroy you all. If you refuse to let her enter, I will permit your species to continue to exist." This could be a taboo tradeoff; Harry is trading his sacred value of anti-death-ness to save Hermione.

I think this theory fits in with the story a little better, but it seems less likely to work. It also has a pretty bad failure mode; the dementor ignores Harry because everyone else in the room expects it to, and Harry has to get Fawkes to take him to Azkaban to make good on his threat. (Does Harry know that Phoenix travel is a fast way in? If not, he can probably guess so.)

Reply
8Dentin
I was never comfortable with dementors being that impressionable. Harry was able to threaten a dozen of them in Azkaban, and sure, he expected it to succeed; but afterward, that dozen returned back to the main body of hundreds of dementors, all of which then refused to assist dozens of aurors, who would have expected them to. I would argue for at least rudimentary intelligence on the part of the creatures.
[-]75th150

I'd like to point out something awesome Eliezer did in the previous chapter, "Cheating". In canon, Potions as a discipline is hardly taught at all. The only thing you ever see Snape do in the books is give a list of ingredients and instructions, tell the class how long the class period is, and assign papers at the end of the class. This is one example of how J.K. Rowling wasn't really invested in developing the mythology of the universe, except as strictly necessary to make her plots happen. (There's nothing wrong with that; they're children's books, not "real" fantasy for adults.)

With the "Cheating" chapter, rather than trying to create a whole framework of Potions rules to understand as he's done elsewhere, he simply added a darn good explanation that legitimizes everything Rowling already showed us. When Hermione lectures Harry on "understanding the principles" in Half-Blood Prince, instead of scoffing about how there's never been evidence of any principles to learn, we can now imagine that there's a very good reason why Harry is never taught the principles of potion-making: if you're not smart, thoughtful, and careful enough to figure the... (read more)

Reply
[-]Xachariah130

Seconded. In retrospect, the Canon teaching of potions now seems incredibly practical. The vast majority of students not only don't need to learn the theory, but it's a negative for them to do so. They only need to learn two things: 1) how to make the potions they'll use every day and 2) whether or not they even can make those potions or if they should just buy them from someone else. Constant repetition with minimal instruction is exactly what you need for a class that's more akin to cooking instead of calculus.

Reply
5moritz
Potions is not the only thing that's neglected in canon; Transfiguration is also "just" taught but never used (except by the teachers). I love it that Harry!MoR puts Transfiguration to good use; after all it seems to be the most general magic manipulation. It feels a bit as if canon and MoR aren't the same fiction subgenre. Canon is about a boy growing up, about action and an isolated society that still parallels the muggle society in many ways. MoR is more about discovering the magical world and about complicated plotting.
2Celer
I never viewed them as really belonging in the same genre. Canon is character focused adolesence tale, MoR is plot focused epic fantasy.
[-]gwern150

I'd say lower probability, but Snape is the obvious villain right now based on what we know about him destroying the notes

Wait, how is this relevant? Destroying the notes is just about cleaning up his SPHEW-related tracks (due to his apparent embarrassment at being a soft touch w/r/t bullying) now that Hermione and her notes are under great scrutiny as possibly being related to her framing.

And in fact, I'd say the notes are evidence against. If Snape had been plotting this all along, one might expect the notes to have been destroyed before the incident is uncovered, say after Hermione left for the duel, since Snape would not be able to guarantee he'd be assigned to look for the notes, that he would be alone or unobserved in every way, etc. If you predict an investigation will find dangerous papers you no longer need, you don't wait until the investigation starts!

Reply
1[anonymous]
I don't see Snape's motives the same way. Here's why I think he's the obvious villain (if my above 'twist' is wrong :/): We know he was behind the plot with SPHEW as the puppet master, and that it centered around Hermione. As a result of his involvement, the bullying situation escalated until Dumbledore had to end it. If not for Malfoy's involvement at the cafeteria, Hermione would have ended her anti-bullying crusade disgraced, embarrassed, and powerless. The fight with the 7th year had the potential to end things in this way with Hermione as well, but it did not due to sheer luck. It would be poor planning on Snape's part if he had wanted to help SPHEW in its fight. His presence at the last big fight is not evidence either way; he could have been there to bolster the slytherins or help SPHEW. In any event, if we look at Snape's plotting in this light, there are now two people plotting against Hermione if H&C is not Snape. This does not make too much sense to me (from a who benefits standpoint) unless you consider Lucius as an option, but he loves Draco and would not plan something that might kill him. Destroying the notes at the earliest opportunity is optimal, but the risk of being detected by Dumbledore OR Quirrell OR the Wards OR the Marauders' Map OR <competent time-turned investigator if the plan doesn't work> is significant if he tried to do so the night of the duel. His window of opportunity is not too large either, because Hermione would notice if they were destroyed too long before the duel. Perhaps Snape went ahead with his plan, confident in his ability as a Slytherin to maneuver the room full of shocked people into letting him search Hermione's room? ((Postscript: After I'm done typing all of this out, it occurs to me that I may have latched too strongly onto this theory and am now defending it because it's a pet theory and not because it's the best theory. I don't think that this is the case, but that's how pet theories feel 'from the inside' anyw
4ahartell
I think it was pretty clear that he was there to help SPHEW. That makes sense given his memory charming of everyone involved and it was (very) heavily implied that he was helping them in other battles.
3[anonymous]
I notice I am confused.... (I reread the Dumbledore conversation speculating that Quirrell was helping SPHEW in previous fights, and that can only be Snape helping.) He could have memory-charmed if he didn't want to be known as working against SPHEW, but it is more likely that he was helping. Now I do not have a good theory for who H&C is.
[-]pedanterrific150

I dunno, I always read that conversation (and the subsequent scenes from Snape's POV) as indicating that Harry actually succeeded in convincing Snape that Lily wasn't all that great and that his carrying that particular torch for so long was pathetic.

In the process cutting the only tie holding Snape to the Light.

Oops.

Reply
[-]see200

Maybe. On the other hand . . . maybe actually winning Snape to Harry's side.

Ch 76 - "I have had two mentors, over the course of my days. Both were extraordinarily perceptive, and neither one ever told me the things I wasn't seeing. It's clear enough why the first said nothing, but the second..." Snape's face tightened. "I suppose I would have to be naive, to ask why he stayed silent."

Let us assume that Snape no longer has any reason to be loyal to Dumbledore. Then where does Snape turn next? Back to Voldemort? MoR!Voldemort, who is not nearly the idiot Canon!Voldemort was (and thus far less likely to trust Snape), who killed Lily despite knowing how important Lily was to Snape, and who with no question would only be using him?

If that were the only alternative to Dumbledore, perhaps. But it isn't.

No, Snape has an alternative. Someone who confronts bullies, instead of leading or tolerating them. Someone who told him the truth, rather than leave him in a fog of lies. Someone of demonstrated intelligence and power. Someone who has already bested Voldemort.

Snape of course cannot bear, in pride, to simply and openly take up the banner of the alternative. But he can at least take up the role of protector of the boy, who really is not particularly like his father.

Reply
7matheist
I've actually wondered which mentor is which, in Snape's telling: my guess is that the first one is Voldemort, and that Snape thinks it's "clear enough" that Voldemort didn't tell him Lily was shallow because he either didn't know or didn't care. The second one is Dumbledore, who didn't tell him Lily was shallow because Snape was only useful to him as long as he still loved her. And Snape would have to be naive to ask why Dumbledore stayed silent, when it's obvious that speaking up could only weaken Snape's loyalty.
4DanArmak
If the first mentor is Voldemort and the second Dumbledore, it's interesting that he speaks of both in the past tense. Why does he have to turn somewhere? Can't he hide, run, sit out the next war, and not risk his life for anyone he doesn't like? Can't he start living his own life for a change? :-)
4see
There's no way either Voldemort or (for example, on the other side) Moody will possibly believe that it's safe to let a Slytherin (ambition!) who has been so high in the counsels of each side to run around free, perhaps plotting to stick his oar in at just the right moment to tip things. Is there a hole deep enough to hide in? That leaves allying with someone who can play on the Voldemort/Dumbledore level. There aren't a lot of possible choices. Maybe Grindlewald, freed from prison, but he was hardly trustworthy. There might be a really, really powerful witch in India we've never heard of, but that would be bad fiction writing. Who else is there? If Snape can overcome his prejudices, the logical choice of ally is Harry Potter.
3Lavode
That is the logical conclusion your sympathies incline you to. I suspect that what Snape sees in HP is at best a future Dumbledore, and quite possibly simply voldy V 2.0 Why the heck sign up for being manipulated and a pawn a third time? Uh-uh. But this may entirely explain what the heck he was/is doing with SPHEW. He picked Hermonie as the potential future ally least likely to stab him in the back when convenient, and SPHEW as the bet least dependant on a single individual. (Because it is an idea. The idea that everyone can stand up and do the right thing.) Without telling anyone. Which is hilarious.
4see
If there wasn't a prophecy directed personally to Snape that made him believe that the ultimate choices are either Voldemort or Harry, maybe.
3DanArmak
From Snape's POV, Harry's camp is Dumbledore's camp - to be around Harry he'd have to keep on being a Professor at Hogwarts, and Dumbledore will make sure he's his piece if he's on his home turf. Harry won't have his own proper camp for years yet, not something he could defend against Voldermort-level opponents by his and his allies' own magic power. There's another reason: (edit: as far as Snape knows...) Harry doesn't know Snape was a Death Eater, a double agent, and the one responsible for delivering the prophecy to Voldemort! If Snape moves openly to support Harry where this doesn't mean supporting Dumbledore, then Dumbledore will warn Harry against him by revealing Snape's past, and Harry won't ever trust Snape after that. The impression Snape created in his last private conversation with Harry was bad enough. Even if Snape merely tries to approach Harry privately, Harry will want to ask him questions about the last war. How did his parents die? What does the prophecy say? How did Dumbledore manage the last war? He'll be asking because Snape was there, but true answers will cast Snape in a very bad light.
6Xachariah
Harry figured this out at the bottom of chapter 46, Aftermath Minerva McGonagall. Three people know. Dumbledore had to not learn first, because then he would only tell the one person who would set the trap (Snape) and only two people would know of the prophecy instead of three. So Harry correctly deduces that McGonagall learned first and told Dumbledore who told Snape who told the dark lord. Whether or not Snape knows that Harry knows, we can't be sure. However, he does know that Harry knows who knows the prophecy. Given just this information he is aware that Harry could deduce that Snape was the mole who helped trap Voldemort. If it seems a little farfetched for everyone to be so smart, I will note that Slytherin House practically recreated the entire scenario, minus the exact specific details, of Harry's blackmail of Snape after one day. Snape would be used to this level of deduction and plotting in his students.
8matheist
Actually, I think the Slytherin students reasoned rationally yet happened not to get the right answer. Slytherin thinks that Snape can get away with being horrible because he's blackmailing Dumbledore, that Harry found out how Snape is blackmailing D, and that D now has to try to please both of them. In actuality, Snape is horrible at Dumbledore's direction, in order that everyone think Snape is blackmailing him, when actually Snape is really on Dumbledore's side (chapter 77). (Or at least D thinks so, based on love-for-Lily.) But Dumbledore really does have to keep Harry happy to some extent, so he directs Snape to be horrible to only half the students. Then D can maintain the fiction that Snape is blackmailing him, and can pretend that Harry is now blackmailing him too by finding out the same secret Snape has. D plays along with Harry's guess that he wants an evil potions master, so that he doesn't have to tell Harry that Snape is secretly on his side.
1DanArmak
Good catch. Although Harry was a little wrong; Snape overheard the prophecy, he wasn't given it by Dumbledore. I don't even know if he was a double agent at that point, or just a simple agent for Voldermort in Dumbledore's camp. He only really went over to Dumbledore's camp because 1) Lily was killed and 2) Voldermort died. There are other explanations that Snape might present for that. For instance, he might claim to Harry that Voldemort told all his top lieutenants about the prophecy before attacking the Potters. The major danger to Snape is a reveal from Dumbledore.
1see
Sure, on the gross level it's just swapping out "tied to Dumbledore's faction because that's where he can watch over his lost love's son" to "tied to Dumbledore's faction because that's where he can watch over someone who might be in his own long-term rational self-interest to support."
3DanArmak
Or more explicitly "tied to Dumbledore's faction because that's the faction that won't be evil to him, and being without a faction is too dangerous".
2Grognor
You definitely put Quirrell's offer to be an ally to Snape in a new light. He may be trying to prevent just that.
5DanArmak
He may have quit loving Lily, but Snape instigated his anti-bullying scheme after his conversation with Harry. I'd say the conversation shocked him out of self-pity and into action, and the action was more or less Good.
2buybuydandavis
I took it that way too. Makes for an improved Snape, and an avoidance of the debacle in canon of the world being saved by creepy guy nursing a teenage crush for decades. Ugh.
[-]DanArmak100

Rationalist Hero Rule #43: don't dismiss known saviors-of-the-world because of Ugh fields.

Reply
[-]buybuydandavis140

I'm increasingly struck by the foreshadowing EY uses. Instead of pulling things out of his ass, he sets up whatever happens. Unlike the original series, I expect a satisfying ending where all the pieces fit together and make sense.

Along these lines, go back and look at the little chat Quirrell had with Harry after they broke Bella out of Azkaban. To summarize Quirrell: People are hypocritical and delusional pricks who will bleed their grandmothers for a nickel. They care nothing for people accused of crimes, but instead sadistically compete to show strength by abusing them. Being young and naive, you can still tolerate them, but once their idiocy strikes at something dear to you, you'll despise them as I do, and decide it's better to rule them than tolerate the abominations that inevitably follow when you don't.

And what happens? Hermione is accused of a crime, which is transparently improbably, but people compete to sadistically abuse her regardless. Their idiocy strikes at something dear to Harry, and in his heart, he declares war on magical Britain, musing "Dark Lord" just doesn't sound as bad as it used to.

EY and Quirrell couldn't have spelled it out more clearly.

Shou... (read more)

Reply
4Pringlescan
I recently reread the chapter where Dumbledore gives Harry his rock. Its kind of shocking at how well it was written where the first time you are completely confused and the second time you are like, "Oh dumbledore you magnificent bastard'
5Blueberry
I'm still completely confused: what happened with the rock?
7Pringlescan
Recap of Chapter 17 and how Dumbledore manages to act insane while still giving meaningful advice and not lying. "Why?" Dumbledore repeated. "Ah, Harry, if I went around all day asking why I do things, I'd never have time to get a single thing done! I'm quite a busy person, you know." Dumbledore means that he doesn't spend all day asking himself 'why am i protecting the magical world' he just goes out and does it. It doesn't mean he just wanders around doing random acts. "I'm sorry," Harry said. He felt wretched at this point, he'd just told off Gandalf essentially, and Dumbledore's kindness was only making him feel worse. "I shouldn't have distrusted you." "Alas, Harry, in this world..." The old wizard shook his head. "I cannot even say you were unwise." Since Dumbledore was the one that wrote the note in the first place Harry WAS wise to distrust him. Dumbledore manipulated Harry like a puppet. "So... why do I have to carry this rock exactly?" "I can't think of a reason, actually," said Dumbledore. A current theory is that it contains the Philosophers stone, its certainly more important than just a rock. Dumbledore can't think of a reason why he would need it but he is giving it to Harry Just In Case, hence why he can't of a reason why Harry might need it. Its the same reason why Harry carries around a full med-kit. edit: Okay as has been pointed out to me its a pretty poor theory that is almost certainly wrong. "This," Dumbledore intoned, "was your mother's fifth-year Potions textbook." "Which I am to carry with me at all times," said Harry. "Which holds a terrible secret. A secret whose revelation could prove so disastrous that I must ask you to swear - and I do require you to swear it seriously, Harry, whatever you may think of all this - never to tell anyone or anything else.". This book is proof that Dumbledore intervened to make Lily Evans distrust Snape, who was the friend she is referring to. Snape whose entire existence is based upon his love for
6DanArmak
If it's the Philosopher's Stone, why would Dumbledore say it was James Potter's Rock, or that he found it in Godric's Hollow? Then again it might be a big rock from Godric's Hollow that contained the (small?) Philosopher's Stone embedded inside. But could Harry Transfigure it if he didn't correctly know its current Form, or whatever the term is? Is it even safe to routinely transfigure the Philosopher's Stone? It also holds the hint that Dumbledore gave Lily that enabled her to come up with the dangerous potion that made her sister Petunia pretty, enabling her to marry Harry's father Professor Michael E-V. Many people think this is the fabled "single point of departure from canon". Could be important, but it's hard to see how.
1Alsadius
But EY has specifically said that there's no single point of departure, so I'm not sure why people are searching for one. If nothing else, the Interdict of Merlin is a departure from canon(even if it took me a while to notice - it's so natural that it seemed to fit right in), and that's 1400 years into the past.
1DanArmak
I seem to remember that someone else quoted him as saying there is a single point of departure, and that's why we're searching for one. Can someone please find the quote if it exists? I'm lazy. Good point about Interdict of Merlin. But if that's the one point of departure, I find it difficult to believe that Eliezer has a good explanation of why it generated so few changes after 1400 years of history that we still have a Potter vs Voldemort scenario at all. Edit: Eliezer has written (at least) this description: I presume the Interdict counts as "other alterations".
0Paulovsk
Yeah, I never thought about it, Maybe D isn't evil, making Snape suffering with Lili; maybe he was just trying to help Petunia.
0Blueberry
Could someone explain how D made Snape suffer?
1Paulovsk
Telling lies, plotting, sneakering invisible in the girl's dorm (writing in her book while invisible), so that Lili disliked Snape.
0Sheaman3773
...or teaching Lily more about potions, by getting her to examine what would happen with different ingredients in various potions.
5glumph
It's certainly not the Philosopher's Stone. The only reason the stone isn't at the Ministry (or Gringotts) is that Hogwarts provides the absolutely best protection: I can't see Dumbledore going and giving it to Harry to wear on his finger.
0[anonymous]
It might just be a rock. It'd violate the rules of storytelling, but Dumbledore reasoned incorrectly, and the laws of probability are LAWS. *ominous thunder* That consideration could take precedence in an author tract like this one, Chekhov's Gun be damned.
3Xachariah
Magic in this universe is like a muscle, the more you use it the more powerful it becomes. Transfiguration in particular is mentioned as being extremely dangerous, but learning early in life gets you disproportionate gains in your adult transfiguration, hence why they even teach it to children. Dumbledore is probably just building up Harry's strength by constantly exercising his 'transfiguration muscle'.
1Blueberry
Wax on, wax off.
0Blueberry
Reasoned incorrectly how?
0Blueberry
Where are you getting this? What makes you think he intervened to make her distrust Snape, and why do you think that's the reason things didn't work out with Snape and Lily? I don't see this from the chapter. Also, what's the deal with Fawkes and the evil parents and him running away?
0Percent_Carbon
I see you already replied to the post that explains this position. Dumbledore said the textbook contains a terrible secret. Telling a teenager how to make her sister magically pretty in a dangerous way is bad, but is it terrible? So there's this theory that the terrible secret is that Dumbledore screwed Snape. You think that's wrong, but do you have an alternate suggestion for a terrible secret that has already been shown to the readers other than the Pretty, Pretty Potion of Doom?
0Blueberry
I figured it was just Dumbledore fucking with Harry because he's crazy, like when he told Harry to carry the rock with him, or when he said Fawkes was a chicken. I don't understand why the writing in the book would have worked to screw Snape. How could anyone guess that it would have that effect.
0pedanterrific
It's not like Dumbledore shies away from flat-out lying when it suits him. Unless you think lying in writing and lying in person are meaningfully different?
5moritz
I have a theory. In canon, the fact that Harry's mother died for him produced some kind of magical protection. Harry had to live with his relatives during the summer to keep that protection alive. Maybe in HPMoR, Dumbledore speculates that Harry can keep that protection in place by carrying a part of Harry's old home (the rock) with him.
5BlackNoise
I think he meant the note that came with the Cloak that said to not trust Dumbledore since he'll take the Cloak from Harry. which he didn't, and then said: And considering that he wrote the note, and set up the mistrust in the first place... Hence, Magnificent Bastard.
0[anonymous]
Harry has repeatedly shown that he's blind to Quirrell's darker motives. It seems to be a necessary contrivance: if he turned against Quirrell before he came fully into his power, he'd lose. I can think of a fictional justification for it, though. He applies the same rationalization to Quirrell's actions that we use when explaining our own, and he does it because he's a copy of the person he's making excuses for. It's probably not psychologically realistic, but it's neat enough that I could suspend my disbelief if it turned out to be the case.
9buybuydandavis
All sorts of biases are at work in Harry towards Quirrell. Halo effect from his power, knowledge, competence, and rationality. Gratitude for saving Harry's life. For helping against the bullies. For sharing the outerspace spell. Respect for Q because he seems to respect Harry, and plays to his vanity. The Uber Competent adult mentor takes him seriously and tells him he is destined for great things, and includes in his plotting and actions. He's the Dad Harry has always wanted. Besides Hermione, he's the only friend Harry has ever had. He didn't quit in Azkaban because he couldn't lose Quirrell. I think that's enough justification for a blind spot in this regard. It would just show that for all his brilliance, Harry is a human being, So I guess I'm answering my own question. It's reasonable for Harry to have this blind spot, and narratively useful for an author who wants to pontificate about biases. At some point, Harry's going to have a talk with himself, or maybe even Quirrell, about how Quirrell spelled it all out to him, but he didn't listen. And to be fair to Harry, he does question Quirrell's motives a good deal. His values him, while not entirely trusting him.
5Xachariah
I haven't been able to find the article at the moment, but there is evidence that we rationalize for friends, family, and allies in the same way we rationalize for ourselves. If you consider someone on 'your side', your brain can go through exceptional mental gymnastics to explain their behavior.
[-]ArisKatsaris140

I don't mind the downvote -- but consider reversing it if my theory is proven right next chapter. :-)

Reply
7Eliezer Yudkowsky
The great thing about being the author is that you get to go "BUURRRNNN" seven days before everyone else. More seriously - I don't think Aris Katsaris was being overconfident. Methods is meant to be solvable; correct solutions should snap firmly into place. The vast amount of overcomplication and hint-denial and stretching that goes on elsewhere shouldn't make people less confident if they're perceiving actual solutions, because those still snap just as firmly into place.
7ITakeBets
How sure are you?
7ArisKatsaris
85%
9ITakeBets
Bet?
7ArisKatsaris
I don't know you. Can you get someone whose word I reasonably trust, like Alicorn or Nancylebov or Yvain or Eliezer to vouch for you?
7ITakeBets
Your concern is reasonable. The only person on these forums who has any reason to trust me with money is Mitchell_Porter. Would his word be sufficient?
[-]ArisKatsaris140

If Mitchell vouches for you, I'm willing to make a bet specified as follows:

  • I'm willing to bet 7 of my dollars to every 3 of yours (to provide me with sufficient margin to make the bet profitable for me, including any uncertainty of followthrough) from a minimum of $35 of mine ($15 of yours), up to a maximum of $210 of mine (90$ of yours)
  • If invoking the debt Lucius owes to Harry is only part of Harry's solution, that still counts as a successful prediction for me. It also doesn't need be called a "life-debt", if it's a lesser type of debt, that still counts. If Harry only threatens to invoke or redeem it, but doesn't actually officially "invoke" or "redeem", that still counts. If Harry claims it for a debt but the Wizengamot disagrees it is one, that still counts. (And if Eliezer states outright I figured it out, ofcourse I win then too)
  • Paypal would be my preferred method of money transfer.
Reply
[-]ITakeBets170

I will take this bet, with the following stipulations:

  • I'm putting up $30 against your $70.
  • If Harry merely mentions the debt, you don't win-- it must be a significant part of the solution. (If necessary, "significant" can be decided by a mutually agreed-upon third party.)
  • If Eliezer congratulates you for thinking of a better solution than Harry's, you don't win.
  • If for some reason Mitchell doesn't vouch for me, no one owes anyone anything.
Reply
[-]ITakeBets210

Please PM paypal info.

Reply
[-]ArisKatsaris170

The money has been received, thank you!

Reply
2thomblake
Awesome
[-]daenerys120

You're obviously a sock puppet (not a bad one, just an anonymous one.) So I just pictured Eliezer making a sock puppet account specifically to take bets on what's going to happen in HPMoR.

My model of EY says that isn't something he would do, but I find the concept hilarious, nonetheless. (And had many giggles while imagining scheming!Eliezer posting good plot ideas he DIDN'T use under a sock account, and then swooping in as another sock to offer bets on said idea, while laughing evilly (can't ignore the Evil Laugh), and raking in the dough :P)

Reply
[-]MBlume120

At Anna and Carl's wedding, I advanced a MoR prediction, which Eliezer offered to confirm/deny iff I first made bets with all present, and I won something like $50 =)

Reply
3Alicorn
I was present and permitted to not-bet.
[-]Mitchell_Porter100

I vouch. :-)

Reply
5Eliezer Yudkowsky
Voting up all comments in this exchange for being virtuous.
5wedrifid
If I know Vladimir at all then he will not - because to do so would be an error. Overconfidence is a function of your confidence and the information that you have available at the time. Vladimir finding out that it so happens that Eliezer writes the same solution that you do does not significantly alter his perception of how much information you had at the time you wrote that comment. Even if you win a lottery buying the lottery ticket was still a bad decision.
[-]ArisKatsaris120

I understand your point, but I'm not sure the analogy is quite correct. In the case of the lottery, where the probabilities are well known, to make a bad bet is just bad (even if chances goes your way).

In this case however, our estimated probabilities derive ultimately from our models of Eliezer in his authoring capacity. If Vladimir derives a lower probability than the one I derived on Harry using the solution I stated, and it ends up my theory is indeed correct, that is evidence that his model of Eliezer is worse than mine. So he should update his model accordingly, and indeed reconsider whether I was actually overconfident or not. (Ofcourse he may reach the conclusion that even with his updated model, I was still overconfident)

Reply
3Eugine_Nier
I think Eliezer's policy as expressed here is better.
6wedrifid
And, looking at the context, not particularly relevant. When they are not yet shown to be right downvoting is perfectly reasonable. Changing your votes retrospectively is not always correct. Unless Eliezer believes the information available to AK is sufficient to justify being 'Very Sure' I do not believe Eliezer's actual or expressed policy suggests reversing votes if he is lucky. In fact my comment about lottery mistakes is a massively understated reference to what he has written on the subject (if I recall correctly). Not that I advocate deferring to Eliezer here. If he thinks you can't be overconfident and right at the same time he is just plain wrong. This is one of the most prevalent human biases.
7Eugine_Nier
I believe Eliezer's policy is to criticize people when they're wrong. If they say something right for the wrong reason, wait; they'll say something wrong soon enough.
2Eliezer Yudkowsky
A number of reviewers said they learned important lessons in rationality from the exercise, seeing the reasoning that got it right contrasted to the reasoning that got it wrong. Did you?
4wedrifid
What do you mean by 'right' here? Do you mean "made correct predictions about which decisions Eliezer would choose for Harry?" While exploring the solutions I am rather careful to keep evaluations of how practical, rational (and, I'll admit, "how awesome") a solution is completely distinct from predictions about which particular practical, rational and possibly awesome solution an author will choose. I tend to focus on the former far more because I hate guessing passwords. I'll respond again when I've had a chance to do more than skim the chapter and evaluate the reasoning properly.
[-]Lavode140

Step one: Stand up and loudly explain how a patronus works, and what a dementor actually is, under the guise of arguing for a diffrent punisment - This will make the entire wizengamot, including the aurors controling the dementor present incapable of casting expecto patronum. Destroy the dementor before it eats anyone. Now the wizengamot has to shut down azkaban (Because the secret would get out). This would not exactly endear him to anyone at all, but they cannot seriously retaliate, because they need him to kill off the dementors before they run out of aurors who havent heard the truth yet. This doesnt actually free Hermonie, just stops them from sending her (or anyone) to azkaban.

Side bonus Harry cannot predict: This would probably also convince Lucius that he isnt Pottermort.

Reply
5Desrtopa
I don't think that simply telling someone is enough to take away their ability to summon a patronus, they'd have to believe you. The members of the Wizengamot don't know Harry has any noteworthy insight or intellect, and so it's likely they would not believe him unless he destroyed the dementor, thereby providing evidence that he does indeed have exceptional insight regarding the nature of dementors.
2TobyBartels
This is the answer that I thought of when I read the chapter (specifically with the ‘blunt force’ amendment below). Unfortunately, it doesn't fit in with the narrative clues that we've been given: there's no taboo trade-off, and it doesn't treat the Wizengamot as individuals. Nevertheless, it would be awesome.
2Asymmetric
Why would Lucius be convinced by that?
9linkhyrule5
... True Patronus? Voldemort?
3LucasSloan
He already interrogated Draco under Veritaserum, so he knows that Draco saw his patronus light. That seems not to have swayed him. Also, if there were going to be a wizard to discover a charm that does something completely impossible, my bet would be on Dumbledore and Voldemort.
2Lavode
Because there is no way Voldemort would be able to cast the true patronus. The nessesary mindset is much to altrusitic. Hmm. Since Hermonie could likely also master the true patronus, wrecking the animal form of the spell for everyone probably shields her from excessive punishment in general as well, at least until such time as a significant number of people other than her and Harry master it. The optimal version of this play is to have Hermonie destroy the dementor present´, but that requires enough time to prep H. Timeturner?
4Asymmetric
We think it's likely that Voldemort can't cast it, but Lucius and the Wizengamot do not, and the only information they have regarding it being a sign of altruism is Harry's word on the subject. It's even more of a stretch to say that Lucius would be convinced that Harry is not Voldemort, because the Patronus alone isn't enough evidence.
[-]pedanterrific140

And Eliezer's Author's Notes have confirmed

Could you do me a favor and quote the exact line that made you think this?

Reply
7DanArmak
Quoting A/N chapter 79: Edited to add: I thought that referred to interpretation of "why did Hermione try to murder Draco? Why was she convinced Draco was plotting against her?" But I see now that it refers to interpretations of the Wham Line specifically. So it more likely means interpretations of "how did Hermione try to murder Draco?" Or even, "what does the accusation that she tried to murder him mean? Did she really try? Or is this a combined Hermione-Draco plot to flush out whoever is manipulating her?" I take it others adopt the second reading. It's apparently the intended one. I retract my claim. Thanks for asking me to quote and so forcing me to reevaluate my evidence. Upvoted!
[-]buybuydandavis130

Anyone else getting the feeling that EY is doing an accelerated wrap up of HPMOR?

We've jumped forward months in the story, and it looks like everyone is in play all at once, for the highest of stakes. The major players all have their beloved pieces at risk in Lucius and Draco, Harry and Hermione, and Albus and Harry.

Also, with the approaching end of the school year, I assume it's the end for Quirrell as well.

But Chapter 83 is The Aftermath. And I believe EY talked about future installments more as novellas, which makes me think those would be retrospective fill ins for the months we've skipped.

Say it aint so. I'm in no rush to see this end, and not to get melodramatic about it, but I think HPMOR has a good chance of being the most important thing anyone on this list ever does. Rand would have been an unknown crank without the novels. A transvaluation of values is made through stories, not Sequences.

Reply
[-]ArisKatsaris180

We've jumped forward months in the story,

I checked again, and chapter 73 says "The March days marched by". Chapter 78 starts at 4th of April, and the day of Hermione's arrest was the morning of Sunday the 5th of April.

So I think your impression is wrong: we're still moving at the pace of about one month per major arc. "Humanism" was January, and "Stanford Prison Experiment" was February, and "Self-actualization" was March. This is now April.

Reply
4buybuydandavis
Thank you. I guess I get another demerit for not paying attention in class.
[-]DanArmak130

I think HPMOR has a good chance of being the most important thing anyone on this list ever does.

Rational DanArmak knows about UFAI and how he can't weigh miniscule probabilities correctly and so on.

Emotional DanArmak is praying oh dear god when HPMOR ends please please let Eliezer go on writing fiction.

Reply
7glumph
He's been writing fiction for a long time. I wouldn't worry.
8DanArmak
I know that, but he's never written long-form fiction before, and may never do so again. It does take a lot of time.
[-]Nominull130

There have been a couple Aftermath chapters already, that's what the author titles chapters within an arc that come after the climax of the arc and wrap things up usually on a character-by-character basis. Chapters 63 and 77 were both Aftermath, but they certainly didn't end the story.

Reply
[-]David_Gerard100

A transvaluation of values is made through stories, not Sequences.

Correct. Stories are how humans learn most things.

Reply
[-]Joshua Hobbes130

Anyways, if the obvious answer is incorrect, we ought to figure out which Hogwarts staff-member has been going around casting memory charms. Now Dumbledore did specifically say "professor" and I doubt that he misspoke, so we can discount Hagrid, Pomffery, etc. So:

  1. Bathsheda Babbling, Ancient Runes. (Never mentioned in books, probably unkown to Eliezer)
  2. Charity Burbage, Muggle Studies.
  3. Filius Flitwick, Charms.
  4. Silvanus Kettleburn, Care of Magical creatures.
  5. Minerva McGonagall, Transfiguration. (Definitely innocent)
  6. Aurora Sinistra, Astronomy.
  7. Severus Snape, Potions.
  8. Pomona Sprout, Herbology.
  9. Sybill Trelawney, Divination.
  10. Septima Vector, Arithmancy.
  11. Albus Dumbledore.

Now, there is one possibility I don't think anyone has brought up yet. H&C could simply be the unwilling pawn anyone capable of using the Imperius, This explains how he/she can have quite brilliant long-term plans, given to them by their puppet-master, but make a few simple mistakes when on their own (Like taking so long to crack Hermione).

Now, we know that Hermione recognized and was very shocked by whomever she saw beneath H&C's disguise, which suggests it was someone she actually knew rather tha... (read more)

Reply
5Eponymuse
The inefficiency of H&C's attack against Hermione's mind is not evidence of a "simple mistake" on his/her part, but rather exceptional cleverness. Note that this attack has replaced something that would be detected (Legilimency) with something that cannot be (Obliviation). I myself take this as further evidence that H&C is Quirrell. Were there other mistakes you had in mind?
2Joshua Hobbes
Using obliviation wasn't a bad move, but H&C used it poorly. More specifically, he used exactly the same disguise he was running around in when manipulating Zabini, when a great manipulator would certainly change their appearance to suit the situation. Not to mention the entirety of his conversation with Hermione strikes me as, well, clumsy. Professor Quirrell can convince most people of most things without multiple trials, and even if he modeled Hermione as putting on a show of goodness H&C's methods are not the ideal way to convince someone like that. Quirrell does not normally have the luxury of obliviation, yet I have no doubt he could have convinced Hermione entirely without it. If he did use it, it would not be enough that she would start to feel tired. He's too good.
[-]Vladimir_Nesov110

Not to mention the entirety of his conversation with Hermione strikes me as, well, clumsy. Professor Quirrell can convince most people of most things without multiple trials, and even if he modeled Hermione as putting on a show of goodness H&C's methods are not the ideal way to convince someone like that.

Experiments that involve talking may superficially resemble clumsy attempts at persuasion. The objective of those sessions was probably not persuasion, so judging their effectiveness by optimality with respect to that criterion is wrong. The objective was probably to map the dynamic of Hermione's thinking. Gaining unlikely powers of persuasion eventually is one possible product of this process, but not its character.

Reply
2Nornagest
I read H&C's frustration in 77 as genuine, which argues for genuine clumsiness. It does seem to have been decisive in getting Hermione to open up about her misgivings, which could argue back in the other direction, but that's not the only place in the dialogue where H&C seems to fit poorly into their role, and the others are all dead ends. In any case, failing to consider surface appearances -- when dealing with a twelve-year-old, however bright -- is really a fairly basic mistake, and one that I'd consider out of character for both Quirrell (who has a fine grasp of psychology) and Dumbledore (who's all about narrative conventions and would probably have gone straight to the fairy godmother guise).
1Sheaman3773
I truly find it odd that no one considers that the evidence was given directly within the text. It's very possible that H&C thought that if ve showed up looking like a fairy godmother, Hermione would think that ve is trying to hide their true nature behind a pleasant mask. Harry certainly would. On the other hand, by openly appearing "incredibly suspicious," Hermione might put aside her doubts with the thought that appearance are deceiving, perhaps in a manner similar to how Quirrell told Harry that as long as he appears ambiguous, people of every stripe will follow him. Ve was wrong in this case, obviously, but just because a choice is wrong doesn't mean it was a stupid one, anymore than a choice being right means it was a smart one.
6Eponymuse
These are good observations. However, I think you are inferring plot points from what is merely literary technique. H&C using the same disguise is well explained by EY intending us to identify Hermione's manipulator with Zabini's. Similarly, the many attempts/Hermione's exhaustion are well explained if EY wants to make it clear what the nature of the attack is without spelling it out explicitly.
3DanArmak
I don't believe that one of the professors who have never appeared onstage in HPMOR could be revealed to play such a central role. Also not those who have appeared very marginally and have not been actually characterized (Flitwick, Trelawney). We also have no reason to attribute motive to one of them. Minerva is, as you say, definitely innocent - because we have a scene from her POV. This leaves, for practical purposes, only Snape and Dumbledore. It's not impossible for there to be a reveal of either one, but the obvious answer is indeed obvious. Nevertheless: Snape is suitably evil, smart, and with reason to hurt Quirrel (he's afraid of him), possibly Harry (after their talk about James Potter), possibly Draco (private war against remaining Death Eater factions or bad blood against Malfoys), and no reason for Hermione that I can think of. Dumbledore... It doesn't seem his style, does it? :-) Certainly if he take him at his word, he believes this to be a heavy blow against himself and Harry. He could have a motive yet to be revealed, but I don't believe this is possible in a story-management sense.
2Pavitra
She could have edited her own mind afterward, as a protection against Legilimency/Veritaserum/etc.
1DanArmak
Well if she did so and didn't use a Pensieve then we'll never find out. I don't believe this can happen, and she's also not characterized in a way that would allow her to be this smart or this evil.
2Eugine_Nier
How's their motive relevant if they're under imperious?
5DanArmak
You're right, the Hogwarts wards don't detect or prevent Imperius cast by and on professors. That actually makes sense to add extra deniability for Quirrel (or whoever is controlling them). Edit: either I didn't see this part of the grandparent or I didn't realize the implications. However, either the Imperius must be maintained indefinitely: too much risk of being found out one day? If something happens to the controlling character, short of death, does it provoke a Will save and break the Imperius? If the controlled character is examined, especially by a Legilemens, the Imperius would definitely be found out but would the controller be identified? Does someone being controlled necessarily know who the controller is? Or it would be maintained for only brief periods, each time erasing the target's memory of being controlled. Note 1: Lucius claims to have been Imperiused for years by Voldemort with at least some plausibility, so presumably all of this is surmountable. Note 2: an Imperiused professor could be ordered to self-erase memories after each time they executed orders from the controller, so the two don't even need to meet to coordinate (pure mental control). This looks like a game-breaking spell. A very powerful wizard who has infiltrated the enemy camp should carry out all of his actions via Imperiused agents. Are there any limitations? For instance, does maintaining an Imperius take up a piece of the controller's magic for the duration? How does one break it if one has captured a controlled piece but cannot face the controller directly? Inquiring minds want to know :-)
3WrongBot
Flitwick is probably also out as an Imperius candidate, being a former international dueling champion and all.
0thomblake
I would not take that as a reason to think that person is unknown to Eliezer - he's well-versed in both HP fanfiction and wiki.
[-]Oscar_Cunningham130

I think it's better than the inconvenience of not being able to see all the comments in a thread at once because there's over 500 of them.

Reply
0TobyBartels
Surely there's a parameter that somebody could change in the bowels of this site?
[-]DanArmak120

This comment gave me the obvious-in-retrospect idea of cloning things with a Time-Turner. Consider:

  • You can make up to six copies of yourself, plus all the items you can carry in magical pouches, which will coexist for slightly less than an hour. Or fewer copies that will coexist for longer.
  • If you have n Time-Turners, you can end up with 6n copies of yourself + items.
  • We have seen that a single Time-Turner can take along an Animagus in a pouch. I speculate that many Animagi (perhaps in separate pouches) can be taken. You can thus use a single Time Turner to duplicate people besides the one actually using it. It's even possible that non-Animagi can be duplicated, if there's some suitable charm for temporarily turning people into animals, maybe.
  • You could probably also duplicate Fawkes.
  • If Dumbledore ever really goes to fight a serious battle, he'll go as an army of multiple-of-six Dumbledores. Some of them will magically disappear every hour until only one remains, but imagine the firepower!
  • Why did Voldemort ever need the Death Eaters? He should have just stolen a few Time-Turners from the ministry. No-one could have resisted an attack by an army of Voldemort clones, super-coord
... (read more)
Reply
9BlackNoise
I don't think you can have more than 6 versions of yourself present at any given time, since any more than that and information is traveling more than 6 hours back. (at least from the perspectives of the earliest and latest self-clone) But still, 6 x Dumbledore+Fawkes is quite the army. Edit: Also, You don't actually need to go through animagus+pouch to transport more than one person on an unrestricted Time-Turner. (Canon also agrees on this if I recall correctly)
0TobyBartels
Yes, Hermione took Harry with her in the awesome part of Book 3.
0daenerys
How important is maintaining continuity for the time turners? If it IS important, then you can only end up with 6 you's (It's noon, go back to 11, pick up that you, go back to 10, pick up that you, etc...) BUT! If your mission takes more than an hour, you will end up with a discontinuity, since then 6:00!you will not be back in time to be 7:00!you so that you's can pick him up. If continuity is NOT important: Go back an hour. Now there are two of you's. Both you's wait around two hours, then both of you go back and pick up the past you's. Now there are four of you's. All four of you's wait around two hours, etc.... You'd end up with 64 you's (assuming you can animagus into a something really small to fit in the pouch that is) Aaaaagh! Time travel makes my head hurt
3linkhyrule5
Reality computes in one swoop. It simply wouldn't happen.
2Eponymuse
Consistency is important. We see this in full force in the Azkaban arc. To get 6 of yourself, starting at noon, you wouldn't go back to 11, then "together" go back to 10. You have already created a paradox because the original 11 o'clock you was supposed to wait until noon and then go back in time. Instead, at 11, you would walk into a room with 5 other copies of you waiting, and then at noon, you and 4 of those copies would go back in time to 11.
0DanArmak
I believe the only restriction is on not traveling back more than six hours by wall-clock time. It's never stated that you can't travel back into the same hour more than six time using more than one Time-Turner.
[-]Xachariah150

The universe makes it rather obvious that you can't. How do we know that? Because the economics of Time-Turners is such that they are only valuable if you have exactly one and any additional time-turners are irrelevant. If time-turners worked that way then...

... You would want as many as you could get. And Hogwarts wouldn't be able to loan them out. If each person can only use 1 time-turner (as I say), then the economic demand is at most the population who's aware of time-turners. If you can use infinitely many time turners, then demand is without limit. The price for them would increase, and Hogwarts wouldn't be free to hand them out like they relatively were inexpensive.

They would have a very high price, and powerful or rich wizards would use them as much as they want. People as rich as Lucius Malfoy would be wearing twenty five time-turners like they were the rapper flava-flav. Upon hearing about Azkaban being attacked, you'd immediately go back six hours instead of one because there would be no reason to not do it. Harry, upon exiting the Azkaban wards, would have run into a patrol of a thousand disillusioned Dumbledores patrolling the sky. Hermione would have gotten arrested, and McGonagall would temporarily recall all the time-turners so that Harry or Dumbledore could have a week of turned time to come up with a defense.

No, the universe does not appear as it would if time turners could be stacked. Indeed if they could, things would look drastically different.

Reply
1Nornagest
I don't think there's a strong economic argument against multiple Time-Turners -- I can think of a number of reasons why the demand for additional loops might run into diminishing returns pretty quickly. Starting with self-consistency problems -- if the simplest solution to a factoring problem that leverages Time-Turning is "DO NOT MESS WITH TIME", then it wouldn't surprise me too much if the simplest self-consistent solution to more complicated and dangerous tasks that involve self-reference is a mysterious death or incapacity on the first iteration. This would be noticed, and Time-Turner abuse would be avoided. Then there's jet lag, synchronization issues, and any number of other things. More than one Time-Turner would definitely be useful (and desired), but the twenty-fifth wouldn't be anywhere close to as useful as the first. That being said, I think you present pretty solid behavioral reasons why we can probably assume it's impossible.
1pedanterrific
For some reason I found this image irresistibly hilarious. The sky is filled with two thousand twinkling stars!
0DanArmak
Very true. Only defense is that people are generally dumb and unimaginative. But that's a pretty good defense in a fictional universe, even if it is a fully general response to some things.
1BlackNoise
Didn't Harry ask Dumbledore if it's possible to get more than 30 hours in a day using multiple time-turners and getting a negative answer?
0DanArmak
I'm not sure he got a plainly stated negative answer. Can someone look that up?
0Eponymuse
Dumbledore doesn't give a straight answer when Harry asks if more than one time turner can be used to get more than 30 hours. On the other hand, we may infer that thirty hours is the limit from e.g. Amelia Bones' behavior in the Azkaban arc:
2DanArmak
That's just the usual limit on information not traveling more than six wall-clock hours back in time, total. It doesn't say or imply that you can't loop yourself more than six times within a small stretch of wall-time.
4BlackNoise
Actually, if you can loop yourself more than six times at any small stretch of wall-time then you can get more than 30 subjective hours in one 24 wall-time day. But it's implied you can't actually do that, which is why I think no more than 6 copies at any given time. Plus, if it were possible you could basically use any one day as a stopping point groundhog-day style in which you can (for example) brute-force read the entire Hogwarts library. At any rate, the general limiting principle is that information cannot travel more than 6 hours backwards, Which I think means that when you draw a graph of a person using time-turners where you represent her using an arrow (going right for positive time, and left in 1h jumps for time-turner use), Then you can't have more than 6 hours of left-arrow in any given 24h wall-time section.
0Eugine_Nier
That would get rather crowded.
0[anonymous]
McGonagall thinks so, at least:
7APMason
The Ministry has access to Time-Turners too. Really, once both sides are using them they'd just have the effect of making battles much, much more awesome.
0DanArmak
And you think that's keeping either side from escalating first, similar to not using Muggle weapons? The Wizarding War is depicted as a limited conflict in canon, IIRC, and certainly in MoR. So you have a good theory. Voldemort was known for his tactical genius, presumably he found ways to escalate that couldn't be so easily duplicated by the enemy.
4linkhyrule5
The problem with this is that they're not clones, they're future versions. So a potion can only be used once, a Time Turner duplicated still only has six "charges," and so on.
0DanArmak
Oops. Very stupid and basic error on my part. You're right, it's not exponential duplication, if you have N turners you get 6*N duplicates. Will fix. Still useful for clone-armies and for duplicating artifacts of power.
2Eponymuse
They wouldn't disappear. They would, after a period, go back in time in order to become one of the other people in the battle. Using a time turner to make clones in battle is a very, very dangerous idea. Harry has been warned, strenuously, by Professor McGonnagal that he should not directly interact with himself, and we have an anecdote about an auror/criminal pair that went insane because they abused time turners. I imagine that one of the more stable time loops would involve the original Dumbledore/Harry getting disabled before going back in time for the first time. But yeah, the cloning objects thing is a reasonable use of a Time Turner. Edit to add: If by collaborating on tricky problems, you are referring to e.g. academic problems, rather than problems of strength, this amounts to a rather absurd charade. If you use a Time Turner to put 6 copies of yourself in a room, and in an hour they succeed in answering the problem, that means that at the beginning of the hour, 5 of them already knew the answer.
4Logos01
There are ways to compute problems such that you do not know the information you are computing. Homomorphic Encryption for example.
0Eponymuse
Good point, though I don't think this would ever be useful. In the unlikely scenario that Time-Traveling Tom has a problem amenable to a straightforward, parallelized algorithm which requires six Tom-hours while Tom needs the solution within two hours, he may as well just go back six hours, "thread" his thoughts, not bother with any communication.
0Logos01
Well... there are other such scenarios. Spend 6 hours brainstorming on an idea. Only mention FAILED ideas aloud amongst your fellow Turn-clones. Do so in a manner that requires "keying" to what specifically you're thinking about at the time. (Such as minutes-into-the-hour). After 6 iterations, acquire profit. This has the added advantage that it follows the "DO NOT MESS WITH TIME" restriction of following by rote.
0Eponymuse
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "keying." Could you elaborate, and explain how you end up with a scenario that is more stable from "Time's perspective" than, say, clone #5 just summarizing all the ideas at the beginning of the hour? The scenarios I can come up with seem to involve information magically appearing (which the universe doesn't seem to like, as in Harry's integer factorization algorithm), or fail to provide a benefit over just thinking on one's own for six hours.
0Logos01
clone #5 summarizing means clones 1-4 never actually have the ideas, but cannot contribute any further to the solution-space beyond claiming they had those ideas. This doesn't create an additive effort to deriving a desired answer from the available solutions-space of your problem. By "keying" I mean something that informs other iterations of the idea you're currently having and its invalidity without telling them the idea. "The thought I had at 5:14 -- it won't work. Move on." This allows all six iterations to contribute towards deriving a viable answer without running into loops which require recursion to reach a stable state, which seems to be the kinds of loops that the Turners don't allow. (Helping a previous version's okay as long as they don't know where the help is coming from; but factoring integers instantly is not.)
0Eponymuse
I see. So I guess there is some benefit gained from this, but it is very minor. It seems to me that the simplest rule that explains why Harry's integer factorization is not okay, but, for example, the "silver on the tree" password from the end of TSPE is okay, is the following: if you would gain information at time T, and send information from time T to any time S < T, then it must be the case that you would have gained that same information even if you hadn't learned it at time S. Now consider your "keying" scenario. We have clones 0-5, and at time 1 clone x goes back to time 0 and becomes clone x+1. When clones give a "time key," it will be a number between 0 and 6, identifying a clone/wall-clock pair. Now suppose at wall-clock time T clone 1 says: "the thought I had at time P doesn't work." Assume for simplicity that time P refers to clone 0 at a wall-clock time S > T (though it would work out the same anyway). Now at time S, when clone 0 has the thought, he has two choices. On the one hand, he can continue working out why it doesn't work, but in this case he gains only the minor benefit of knowing in advance that it will not work out. On the other hand, he can move on and not consider the thought, but at time T as clone 1 just repeat (without knowing why), the fact that it doesn't work. In that case, he gained information that he would not have learned had he not told himself. Or, in your terminology, recursion was required in order to reach a stable state.
0Logos01
that doesn't follow. Where would Harry have gotten the pies if not from Harry+1? The recursion is non-iterative beyond the number of loops actually manifested, however. Each individual only adjusts the one previous, and only in immediately non-iterative manners. "Nope. Nope. Nope. Maybe. Nope. Nope. Maybe." That lets you prune out failed items but doesn't recurse back to an instantaneous success.
0Eponymuse
He got them from the breakfast table. Where did he get the idea to get them? Well, he would have seen the pies later on anyway. Just like he would have learned about time turners later on in the day anyway, but a more stable scenario was obtained by learning about them earlier. I'm not quite sure how to parse this. If you would think about an idea at time T, but don't because future you tells you it won't work out, that means your whole thought process going forward has completely changed. But maybe the thing you start thinking about instead doesn't work out, so someone warns you about the idea at time T+epsilon. And so on. So if you are proposing that Time works by iterating through a number of scenarios until you get to something stable, the situation you've pointed to "requires recursion." (It's worth pointing out that Harry, when he gets his Time Turner, doesn't think this is a likely answer to how Time works.) But perhaps I am not understanding you correctly? My main objection to the scenario you are proposing, though, is that you are gaining information as a result of some work, but that work is never performed. Try taking your scenario to its logical extreme. You sit in a room with one copy of future-you, and a large composite number N on a sheet of paper. On scrap work hidden from future-you, you write down an integer K. If you are not told that K does not divide N, you check. If it does, you keep track of the factor of N you have found. In any case, you then systematically select a new integer K' to check for divisibility. Once you have a complete factorization, you sit quietly, and at the end of the hour you go back in time. Then, you let past-you know the "keys" for all of the integers that weren't factors. Thus, you must have ended up only trying actual factors. So, you have a slightly more complicated version of Harry's factorization algorithm. Edit to add: I guess this situation actually still is still an exponential time algorithm, since you still
0Logos01
No. That's where Harry+1 got them. Harry did not. Six turnings of the Turner at T=0 results in the same 1-hour segment being looped into 6 times. This allows six iterations -- but those iterations do not recurse beyond the actual number of loops. < is that you are gaining information as a result of some work, but that work is never performed. That doesn't follow. How do you figure?
2Eponymuse
Sorry, I'm really not following your pie argument. Harry would learn about the pies in the near future; since it is his style, he would think about throwing them to frighten the bullies. So, his observation of Harry+1 throwing the pies is not necessary for him to think to throw pies anyway. What do you mean by "they don't recurse"? Surely the fact that this procedure results in fast graph isomorphism testing shows that it is not a particularly "stable" solution? Or, do fast integer factorization by writing down the first digit for the least factor greater than 1, listen as future you says "no, no, maybe," and change it to whatever, and then figure out the second digit, and so forth. The scenario you've outlined results in nearly instant integer factorization (or password guessing, or whatever), so it is probably illegal.
1JoshuaZ
Note that both graph isomorphism and integer factorization are problems that may well lie in P, so these aren't great examples. Traveling salesman is a bit better.
0Eponymuse
Sure, though my impression is that people don't think graph isomorphism actually is in P. And integer factorization turned out to be a problem for Harry. But you're right, we can actually just simulate a nondeterministic Turing machine this way: every time you have a choice for which state to visit next, just listen as future you tells you which ones not to visit.
0Logos01
Harry+0's actions or non-actions were radically transformed by the act of Harry+1's throwing the pies. The solutionspace for Harry+0's problems were altered by the actions of Harry+1. From this we must derive the answer that iteration can alter outcomes. However, from the factoring of primes we see that the TT resists allowing iteration to recurse beyond the actual number of iterations. Where number-of-iterations = i, where i < 6, then Harry+0..i can perform as many recursive alterations of his own solution-seeking as can be achieved without exceeding the value of i.
4DanArmak
I realize that. For other observers' practical purposes, they would disappear. Meh, she worries about that kind of thing too much.
0TobyBartels
Most of the replies to this comment no longer appear on the main page of the topic, no matter how many buttons I push.
0TobyBartels
I forget if we're discussing MoR or canon, but either way I object. In canon, my objection is pedantic: it's Hermione who was warned, and she only later passed on that warning to Harry. In MoR, Harry has interacted with himself, a few times, and while they didn't all go well, there were no disasters.
3pedanterrific
Not that strenuously:
0Eponymuse
You're right, I misremembered. Still, I think there is a lot to suggest that interacting directly with one's time-clones (as opposed to waiting with one's eyes closed while a clone drops off a message, for example), particularly in battle, is a bad idea. You would never observe a future-you doing something ineffective in combat---failing to dodge or block, or casting an ineffective spell, for example---since, after observing that mistake, you would be prepared for it in the future. So the only consistent possibilities involve losing or running away before you can go back in time, or winning right away. But, since you know these are the only consistent possibilities, if you showed up to a battle intending to use a Time Turner and didn't see your time clones appear at the very beginning, you would deduce that you would not win, and therefore (if you could) you would run away. So, I expect that from Time's perspective, the most stable solution for people who intend to use Time Turners in battle is for them to not do battle at all.
0Eponymuse
He has never interacted directly with himself in a way that involves seeing a copy of himself, or coordinating actions in real-time, as would be the case in a battle. Harry has so far always heeded Professor McGonnagal's advice, and looked the other way when his time clones are around. Though, as pedanterrific points out, I have overstated the severity of McGonnagal's warning.
0buybuydandavis
Just Say No to time travel in stories. There's no end to this kind of stuff. Use it to throw pies. Fine. But please don't make it a magic bullet to resolve some plot line.
2gwern
When time travel is well-defined, it's not a problem. For example, I don't think anyone has ever accused Primer of using time travel as a magic bullet.
2[anonymous]
And Homestuck just doesn't have any plot point which isn't time travel in some way.
0wedrifid
More as a magic LSD substitute.
[-]malthrin120

What happened here?

The Veritaserum was brought in then, and Hermione looked for a brief moment like she was about to sob, she was looking at Harry - no, at Professor McGonagall - and Professor McGonagall was mouthing words that Harry couldn't make out from his angle. Then Hermione swallowed three drops of Veritaserum and her face grew slack.

Reply
[-]razor11110
  1. If Hermione's testimony had changed from last time, I'd have guessed that McGonagall was mouthing a spell or trying to Confound Hermione so she gave a different testimony under Veritaserum.
  1. Since that isn't the case, she was either trying to: a) provide moral support for Hermione ("Keep strong" and such)

b) communicating something. If it's this, then I strongly suspect that McGonagall is cooperating with future Harry in some rescue plan. She might be communicating a simple message like "Don't worry" or "We'll get you out" which would imply that she has some extra knowledge about how things are going to play out.

But what she told Hermione shouldn't be very important as there was no way to know that Hermione, in her tired state, would understand the significance of whatever McGonagall mouthed.

Reply
4Normal_Anomaly
Extra supporting evidence for this: McGonagall isn't the sort of person who would give false reassurance. If she didn't see any way to get Hermione out of this, she would say "keep strong." If she's saying "don't worry" then Hermione has some reason not to worry.
0dspeyer
Dumbledore says "if it is not dismissed soon, some of us may miss their entire luncheon". That means the hearing is taking place in the morning. The earliest future!Harry can show up is 3pm. Of course, she could have information from future!Dumbledore or Harry could have sent a note via Margaret Bulstrode.
8Danylo
Maybe H&C's final form was McGonagall? That'd be a fun twist.
2Alsadius
She's the only sane one of Hermione's friends who was present? (There may be more to it, but it's hard to say)
2DanArmak
Why would Hermione consider Harry not sane?
3staticIP
Because he's insane.
2DanArmak
How come?
2staticIP
My running theory is because he's a horcrux, but it's hard to say. Apparently there's one point where this fix departed from cannon, if we can pin point that you'll have your answer. Alright, fine. An actual non-sarcastic answer. He plays with the trope of being insane. He's entire chaos legion cackles maniacally. He is very certain of strange ideas that are almost the opposite of that his experienced elders believe, about their areas of expertise. From that point of view it's easy to see why people would think he's crazy. Not to mention the simple fact that he doesn't adhere to social rules like normal people do.
1DanArmak
The short answer is that this hasn't stopped Hermione from trusting him and considering him her friend before. And she did look at Harry later (once convicted) begging for help. The only open question is whether there was something significant Minerva mouthed to her that we're not aware of. I consider this very unlikely.
2staticIP
Yeah, I'm not arguing the point. I just have a weird sense of humour and "Because he's insane" tickles my funny bone.
[-]ArisKatsaris120

It's not really a problem. Currently we are in a phase of rapid fic updates so there'll be lots of comments, but afterwards it'll slow down again for some months, I'm sure...

Reply
[-]Dentin110

The best solution I've been able to come up with on my own involves Harry breaking the compact between the dementors and the ministry:

"I am not yet done!

Lucius, while I appreciate you desire for vengeance, pointing it at the wrong target gains you nothing. However, it does inconvenience me. Hermione Granger is mine. I have claimed her, and I will have her, healthy and with her magical abilities intact.

Dementor! The compact you have made with the Ministry has been broken. I have already begun teaching the charm which was used to destroy one of your kind at Hogwarts earlier this year. You will return immediately to Azkaban and tell the other dementors to leave that place. Should any of you wish to side with the ministry, be certain that we will destroy you all. Go, now."

[dementor leaves]

"We are now at war. The spell to destroy dementors does in fact exist, a fact Albus Dumbledoor will verify. However, it is powerful, and can only be cast by very few wizards, wizards of a particular mind. Those who learn of it and fail will be permanently robbed of their patronus.

Hermione is one of the few wizards who can learn to cast the spell, and we all need her with her m... (read more)

Reply
[-]Danylo100

Hah. Fun, but completely unreasonable. The Wizengemot is ultimately responsible for the safety of wizard-kind, and though they're pretty selfish when it comes to minor issues, as soon as a Harry makes the threat to disable wizard-kind's defenses against Dementors, everyone, Dumbledore and Malfoy and Bones and so on, will be his enemy, and they will disable him.

Reply
1Dentin
It says nothing about disabling anyone's defenses against Dementors; it is a fait accompli, where Harry simply states that anti-dementor spells now exist and are being actively deployed. The Wizengamot can disable him if they want, but it will not change the situation (unless they know Harry is bluffing.) And why disable one of the few wizards who -can- actually combat the dementors? The only reason the ministry used them in the first place was because there was no way to destroy them.
0Danylo
Actually, that's not the only(or even best) solution. It's pointed out in a previous chapter that intimate knowledge of such spells disables the regular patronus. Which is Harry's only weapon at this point - that threat. He can't say "I can kill dementors" without making the threat because he'll become an obvious man behind the break-in. What will he do, threaten to destroy them? They'll just send his ass to jail. No, he needs some kind of threat to the wizengamot, which in this case would be to ruin their Patronus spell. However, that still won't work because D knows what Harry can do and can likely stop him before he fully explains the his theory, and if that he fails at that, it'll be a pretty simple task to kill/disable him and then Obliviate the various wizards present.
5Alsadius
Your plan basically relies on stripping your country of one of its most powerful weapons and then having the leaders of your country thank you for it. Good freaking luck.
3Dentin
(You mean like how the USA was stripped of multi-megaton thermonuclear weapons and how pretty much everyone was happy about it?) My intent was that he should present it as an already accomplished fact. The alliance with the dementors was an uneasy one at best, something to be tolerated because there were no good solutions. This changes that - the alliance is broken, and there is a good solution.
4glumph
In canon, at least, the Fudge/Umbridge faction of the Ministry embrace the alliance pretty wholeheartedly:
5Anubhav
Upvoted for the sheer epicness, even though I doubt it's going to happen.
[-]hairyfigment110

Chapter 26, "Noticing Confusion" : Don't know if anyone has pointed this out yet, but Quirrell says, "I...need to go off and set something in motion," before apparently going off to accost Rita Skeeter. During their conversation (Ch 25) she thinks about the alleged fact that a tipster directed her to Mary's Room, where she will shortly die. Now she may have thought this before meeting Quirrell -- she definitely had somewhere to be -- but then why would he bother to speak with her?

I just looked at the passage again, and it seems worse than that. She actually thinks,

And his hair was already falling out? Couldn't he afford a healer?

No, that wasn't important, she had a time and a place and a beetle to be.

Reply
6Eneasz
My reading: In 25 Harry asked the Weasley twins for help, and told them not to involve Quirrell in their plot, because he didn't like publicity. The Weasley twins agree, but are amused that Harry doesn't know them that well or he wouldn't have brought up Quirrell at all, and say they'll do Quirrell on their own time. This part is never explicitly stated, but I assume they alert Rita to Quirrell and manufacture some silly rumors about him being a former Death Eater and training Harry to be the Next Dark Lord. Rita then publishes an article making those exact accusations. Quirrell confronts Rita about this. He pulls up his arm to show no Dark Mark. But she clearly shows she considers herself above all the rabble, doesn't give two damns about journalistic integrity, and simply doesn't care who she hurts. It is at that point that she thinks about Mary's Room, and turning into a beetle. It is implied that Quirrell was reading her mind as she thought that, so now he has knowledge of her snooping habits and morphing abilities. He deliberately puns on this, saying that he now can't resist the urge to simply "crush" her instead. I don't think this first meeting was orchestrated by Quirrell, it was unrelated and simply gave him the knowledge he needed to set up her murder. I deduce that Quirrell later leaks to her anonymously that he'll be meeting with Harry in Mary's room and something juicy will happen. I find it pretty damn delicious the way he toys with her without Harry's knowledge, she must've had a hell of a sphincter-tightening moment when he audibly considers casting a spell to reveal any animagi in the room. And it's awesome the way you (as a reader) don't notice that until your second read-through.
3matheist
I agree — though it's hard to tell because chapter 25 is written out of order. But a week passes between when Harry asks the twins for a plot and the lunch with Quirrell when Harry reads the paper: Act 2 is stated as happening on Sunday; directly afterwards, in act 3, Harry talks with Draco and borrows 40 galleons, and sometime afterwards, probably directly after, in Act 4, Harry asks the twins for a plot, and the twins also discuss pranking Quirrell. In Act 5, the twins ask Flume for help, and show him an article in "yesterday's edition of the Daily Prophet", titled "THE NEXT DARK LORD?". In Act 6, Quirrell quotes that title when he confronts Skeeter; he also mentions he has no dark mark, which is one of the elements of the twins' discussion in act 4. So at some point in the week between Act 4 (either Sunday or soon after) and Mary's room (Saturday), the twins convince Skeeter of certain things about Quirrell. The Prophet publishes the Quirrell article. At some point early the next morning, the twins ask Flume for help with Harry's article. At some point after that, and before Saturday, Quirrell confronts Skeeter on the street. In summary, there's almost a week of lost time in chapter 25, which makes it a little difficult to see that the twins were behind Skeeter's article on Quirrell, but there are enough hints in there to make it a sure thing.
3gwern
A last chance? If she had done the right thing and apologized or retracted it, she would have shown up at Mary's Room and observed absolutely nothing of interest or been ejected or confounded or something. The trope might be Last-Second Chance, although this seems to be more of a martial-arts sort of trope where you are ultra-polite and correct as you give the other person a clear statement of their mistake and a chance to rectify it before you open the can of whoop-ass on them (Martial Pacifist).
[-]Vaniver100

Destroys the dementors by destroying himself? Destroys the dementors, and lets out the criminals of wizarding Britain? Destroys the dementors, and is put down for rebellion?

There are no happy endings down that path.

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr100

I find Dumbledore morally confusing.

  • His main policy in the fic is inaction.
  • His reputation in the past of the story is of successful and (by the standards of the wizards) moral leadership. He earned vast respect in the wizarding world without resorting to Lucius' blood-purist politics or Voldemort's insistence on slavish obedience.
  • The few specific deeds he's done at his own initiative are somewhere between weird and vile. (Jinxing Snape's relationship with Lily; planning for Harry to have wicked step-parents; etc.)

Largely inactive in the present, good and effective in the reputed past, weird or vile when we actually see him act.

Has there been a leader in real life like this? If this was a real-life person, what would we say about them -- that they were a good leader once, and now they're a crazy one?

Reply
[-]Alsadius140

Dumbledore has no difficulty with action when needed(TSPE, most notably), but he's been burned too many times by the cost of his efforts to be eager about it. He'd much prefer to stop the war by passive deeds(sequestering Harry, poisoning Voldemort's father's grave, etc.), and not risk the bloodshed that open war would cause, or even the loss of political capital caused by a showdown with Lucius Malfoy. There's bound to be a big difference between an 11 year old sci-fi fan and a hundredish year old veteran when it comes to eagerness to do harm, and frankly I think that Dumbledore's caution is at least as justified as Harry's sneakiness when it comes to planning a war. After all, Harry's never seen one of his incredibly clever plots fail, and he's eleven, so he is naturally going to be far too eager. Inaction isn't always wrong.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific130

I think you need to consider the idea that this is the way he's always acted.

His handling of the Grindelwald business can be summed up as several years of inaction followed by the most spectacular duel in recent history. Presumably he didn't explain the blood sacrifices + Deathstick = invincibility thing to everyone who asked, so he must have skated by on inscrutability.

He states with a certain bitter pride that he taught Voldemort he doesn't give in to blackmail or threats to hostages- which he (hopefully, considering the alternative) accomplished through more inaction.

When you think about it, a wizard with tremendous magical and political power who doesn't seem to actually want to do anything with that power is pretty much the best case scenario for a lot of people. Imagine that Dumbledore suddenly decided to act on Fawkes' advice: how much of Wizarding Britain is left standing?

Reply
4moritz
I thought his response to blackmail of his allies was to burn Narcissa Malfoy (or at least have everybody thinking that he burned her alive).
2pedanterrific
That would be the alternative, yes.
[-]SkyDK100

Given Harry's knowledge about basic game theory and decision making theory how come he's so bad at producing fake information? I refer both to his dealings in conversations (where he arguably has increased his game level), but even more so in the mock battles. Not hiding the creation of green sunglasses did seem unnaturally stupid taking into consideration:

  1. He knew scouts might be sent to track his dealings (it is after all a basic of military tactics as well as the logical thing to do against an enemy you know is outnumbered when you have to figure out what he does to deal with his disadvantage).
  2. The cost/benefit was vastly in favour of benefit.
  3. He himself had trained Draco to acquire better information before acting.

Furthermore I'm rather stunned by how bad at constructing ambushes and firing lines Harry is.

Reply
[-]loserthree120

It was unlikely that his enemies would see what was being done, so unlikely that they did not think to prepare. So unlikely that, appropriately enough, it was mentioned in chapter 78:

The Dragons had started the combat with a feint to provide a distraction for Mr. Goyle's approach through the forest; Neville hadn't realized there were two brooms attacking until almost too late. But the Chaos Legion had gotten the other pilot. That was why broomsticks usually didn't attack before armies met, it meant a whole army would concentrate fire on the broomstick.

The Dragons sacrificed a broom to see what was up. This is a significant sacrifice as they have only two and their enemies have a total of four between them.

It would not be surprising for the next battle, if there is one, to include some protection against aerial espionage. Better spy-planes would be another reasonable result of this battle. The first thing you do is fly higher.

Reply
5SkyDK
First of all. Thank you for pointing this quote out! Well, I'd say the first thing you do is hide better :) It hardly needed much more than a cloack over the object about to be transfigured. Perhaps another weakness of Harry's, overcomplicating? I appreciate the sacrifice made and the development by the character of Draco. Still, for any good mastermind in the making keeping your top-secret plan top-secret is usually an extremely good idea.
6Daniel_Starr
To be a good con man, you have to think like other people. Harry's not good at that. A con man has to be good at playing to other people's superficiality. Harry can't stand not asking questions. So he finds it hard to model others' willingness to not ask questions. Also, he's in love with getting the right answer, which makes it hard for his brain to think over wrong answers to offer people, even enemies. This is why Harry has no instinct for ambushes and active (lie-based, rather than silence-based) deceptions. Someone like Harry can train to actively lie, deceive, ambush, etc. He'd do fine. But active deception is one of those social skills, like flirting, that mucks with the user's own cognition and so takes more practice than smart people initially think. As for formation tactics, drilling people to act together is another less-questions-more-cooperation trait that Harry's never been good at. Chaos is definitely his right army name.
9DanArmak
Quirrel made a little speech, at the end of Azkaban, about how unusually good Harry was at that. It was plausible enough to make Harry himself tentatively believe it.
[-]TuviaDulin100

And, as we already know, Quirrel is a very, very good con man.

Reply
2SkyDK
Well, I'd say there's a clear difference between ambushing (deception in tactical combat situations) and lying/manipulating (social deception in micro-situations). The first requires way less self-deception: the requirement here is not control of vocal tone, facial expression and knowledge innuendo and social graces; no, here an understanding of which parts of the enemy forces the enemy appreciates, and which targets he would like to hit in your own army. The second calculations; terrain and so on are also logical advantages. So in effect it can easily be a silence-based deception yet Harry is still surprisingly mediocre in this aspect. Given that they are already in military outfits, a well-constructed ambush should be able to drop more than third of an enemy force before they even knew what hit them (this just by the most simple solution: half hidden, half baiting). A little instigated chaos by the non-hiding part might very well be necessary so as to negate the counter-ambush advantage of the maps. About the "drilling people" together; that has already been mostly done by his reputation and being in a situation very much like The Robber's Cave scenario. All he had to do was exploit the chaos he loves to create and have his running troops run so as to V around two sides of the enemy's O positions (V and O are here used as visual representations of the formations in question). I concur with you on the second part and I applaud the sharp observation on the aspect of self-deception/mucking one's own cognition when it comes to social interactions.
[-]Xachariah90

Whenever someone commits cold-blooded murder their soul is ripped in two

I see what you did there.

Reply
[-]DanArmak90

Harry has the legendary Lost Sword of Humerus Hufflepuff in his pouch.

Be prepared! As through life you march along! Don't be nervous, don't be flustered, don't be scared - be prepared!

Reply
[-]DanArmak90

We have Word of God (in comments above) that Harry is about to come up with some plan. However, that plan may yet fail, or it may not be executable during this Wizengamot session but only a few hours or days later.

If Harry does not succeed in rescuing Hermione now, or at least publicly show that he has a credible plan in motion, then I predict (50% probability) that right afterwards Quirrel will approach Harry with a plan for 1) breaking Hermione out of Azkaban 2) consolidating a public political platform in line with destroying Azkaban (Harry's goal), inc... (read more)

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr90

They could adopt/legitimize Draco's children by another lover. As Harry's fanclub says, he and Draco and the lady could have one of those, you know, arrangements...

Reply
[-]pedanterrific90

Since when? A while ago he convinced Dumbledore to give him the full six hours rather than two, but I don't think we were ever told that he can use it at will now.

ETA: From Chapter 77, Self-Actualization Aftermaths, emphasis mine:

(Some time later, an earlier version of Harry, who had invisibly waited next to the gargoyles since 9PM, followed the Deputy Headmistress through the opening that parted for her, stood quietly behind her on the turning stairs until they came to the top, and then, still under the Cloak, spun his Time-Turner thrice.)

Reply
[-]hairyfigment90

Actions like that ensured that Bellatrix's devotion to Voldemort was not a happy memory for her, and therefore would survive in Azkaban for as long as she did. It might even have prolonged her life (though I rather doubt he tortured her for her own good).

Reply
3wedrifid
Nice one.
[-]Daniel_Starr90

I would be surprised if Harry's knowledge of Muggle science, as such, was his edge over Voldemort. This Voldemort Horcruxed a spacecraft.

And I would be surprised if Harry's "rationality" in the general sense was his edge. Quirrellmort seems plenty clear-thinking.

On the other hand, you're right that Harry is much more of an experimentalist than Quirrellmort seems to be. Voldemort in this fic seems to be brilliantly efficient rather than brilliantly creative.

So perhaps Harry can defeat Voldemort through the power of experimentation. Not so much Science as The Scientific Method.

Reply
6wedrifid
On the other hand, this Voldemort Horcruxed a spacecraft.
1Anubhav
Horcruxing a spacecraft isn't nearly the same thing as being able to do magics thought impossible by figuring out the general principles of magic.
5pedanterrific
The thought occurs: you know what would be really great? If Voldemort keeps abreast of cutting-edge physics journals and invented partial Transfiguration first, and just never told anyone about it. Even if he didn't, the fact remains that Quirrell knows Harry was able to cut through the wall of Azkaban somehow. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he figured it out purely through deduction.
[-]wedrifid80

you cannot unknow any of this stuff except by obliterating yourself.

Obliterating? That's perhaps overkill!

Reply
[-]pedanterrific80

There is a human sacrifice, a murder, of that I am certain; committed in coldest blood, the victim dying in horror.

Pretty sure it's not a valid sacrifice if the human doesn't die.

Reply
[-]ArisKatsaris80

Harry asks Draco if Draco had submitted him to torture with no intention of helping him. Draco is already under the effects of Veritaserum, so he'll testify.

Draco isn't even present. His earlier testimony under Veritaserum was simply read aloud.

And also the possibility of utilizing Draco's use of torture was mentioned and rejected in the previous chapter, as Lucius Malfoy may well have obliviated anything incriminating he found in Draco's mind under his own Veritaserum interrogation of his son.

Reply
2SkyDK
My bad. Speed reading and sleep deprivation is a bad cocktail if you want a keen eye for detail. Thank you. Given that I'll retract my previous comment.
[-]MarkusRamikin80

What I wanna know is what Lucius even thinks is going on. What his mental model of the situation is. It's unclear to me. A plot by Harrymort to inoculate future Death Eater and trusted lieutenant Draco against pro-muggleborn ideas by having him severely disappointed in Hermione? Well maybe not, but surely a man with that much control and intelligence is thinking something rather than just blindly grasping for revenge...

Reply
[-]Xachariah150

My mental model of Lucius says he believes...

  • Harry is Voldemort (Who is still strong in some ways but weak in others)

  • Harrymort has been trying to split Draco from his father.

  • Harrymort has been using a new ideology to recruit Draco.

  • This new ideology is incompatible with the previous ideology.

  • Harrymort has no use of his old allies as he hasn't let them in on anything and he's using an incompatible ideology.

  • Harrymort's gathering of power and allies/minions (eg Hogwarts students) will take at least a decade to come to fruition.

  • Harrymort is in a weak position right now and in danger of losing a key piece. (Hermoine would be his Bellatrix.)

  • Harrymort seems to be on Dumbledore's side in the court room and ideologically.

So, assuming Lucius isn't just acting on rage, he's decided to align himself against Harrymort and with whoever it is that's attacking him. Perhaps he's hoping that he can destroy Harrymort soon enough before he becomes invincible withe the passage of years. Perhaps he hopes by aligning the House of Malfoy against Harrymort publicly, whoever attacked his son won't target him again and risk losing the Malfoy's support. Perhaps he thinks Harry is strongly allied enough to Dumbledore to lie to Lucius. Although I'm more of the mind that he's acting on blind revenge, or at least it's clouding his vision enough to make poor choices at the moment.

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr140

He might think that Harrymort is toying with his son for pure amusement, Bellatrix-style; or that Dumbledore set Hermione on Draco.

But he can punish Hermione as a demonstration of his ferocity now, while he waits and hopes to find the real villain later.

Lucius probably knows that he doesn't know enough; on that he agrees with Harry. The difference is that he doesn't see that as a reason to let Hermione off; he sees Hermione as at least an opportunity to send a message to his real enemy, whoemever he is, not to take the House of Malfoy lightly.

Reply
1Vaniver
Who benefits from Draco being anti-muggleborn? It's not Harry, it's Lucius.
1MarkusRamikin
In the short term. If Harry is Voldemort and one day intends to reveal himself and get his followers back, though...
2DanArmak
If Harry hadn't been trying to "turn" Draco, then Draco would have been firmly anti-muggleborn all along.
1MarkusRamikin
Most likely, yeah. Still, Harrymort would then be able to look at the new Death Eater Draco as his own handiwork instead of Lucius', and that's something that might appeal to the Dark Lord. No, I didn't mean that to be a terribly plausible theory, just couldn't really think of what Lucius might be thinking that would make better sense. I now agree with most of what Daniel Starr said.
1Vaniver
Voldemort lost with those supporters; he may as well change his ideology, get new supporters, and the old ones that know which way the wind is blowing will come back anyway.
[-]NihilCredo80

Eliezer, could you please confirm / deny / decline to answer whether the fic is past its halfway point? I have a persistent memory that you did at one point state that it was, but I can't find that statement so I'm wondering if I just crossed a couple of brain-wires.

e: while I'm here, I was rereading random chapters and spotted a typo in Ch. 14: "Good heavens, Mr. Potter, do you think these would be allowed to students".

Reply
4Anubhav
I remember that too. I can't find that statement either.
[-]Alsadius80

An idea: We're discussing lethal magic, of the sort that even Quirrell is unlikely to have taught. Has anyone checked that she even knows the Blood-Cooling Charm? She reads a lot, and Quirrell is unlikely to have left a hole that obvious in his plan, but this seems like something that may be worth checking.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific120

This occurred to me, but Hermione really shot herself in the foot by publicly demonstrating the ability to successfully cast a charm above her year level on the first try, from nothing more than having glanced at the instructions once.

Plus, just from naming conventions I would expect that spell to have non-lethal uses- it's not called the Blood-Cooling Curse, or even Hex, but Charm. Maybe it's a treatment for heatstroke, or the counter to the Blood-Boiling Curse. In any situation other than under Hogwarts' wards, a Charm that takes six hours to kill an unconscious first-year isn't that big a deal, compared to, say, Levitating them off a cliff and dropping them.

Reply
6Alsadius
True, but it's a question that might get asked under Veritaserum. (That said, we are talking about Hermione here. She can probably learn the spell from the false memory of having cast it once. So this test isn't likely to be conclusive.)
8pedanterrific
Exactly. Which, while awesome, is not especially helpful in this one particular case.
2JacekLach
Spells that extract the history of spells casted using a wand are canon, afaik (or was that just the most recent spell?) I would expect they were casted on hermiones wand and the usage was confirmed.
1Alsadius
Thing is, it only checks the most recent. Any minor spell cast afterwards clears the prior incantem, so a different spell showing is not going to count for much. And they never actually said that they had that piece of evidence, which they certainly would have if they'd known.
0Sheaman3773
We only saw it used to check the most recent spell. We don't know that it can't go further back, and in fact in fanfics it often can go through the recent history of the wand.
0Alsadius
But that's not canon IIRC, which means that it should be assumed not to be the case unless EY says otherwise.
0Sheaman3773
The Priori Incantatem effect of the brother wands meeting certainly seems based on Priori Incantato (though why was never explained that I could recall) and that one certainly did go back further than just the last spell.
[-]MinibearRex80

I don't really buy that motivation. Even if Harry becomes Dark, it's unlikely that he will then instantly become buddies with everyone else on the Dark side. Instead, I would expect Dark Harry and Dark Voldemort to be bitter enemies, trying to be the sole ruler of the world.

The best motivation I came up with for Voldemort turning Harry dark is that he intends to possess him, or dispose of him and sustain himself on polyjuice. In that case, Quirrellmort might well take actions that look like actions intended to help Harry rule, in addition to moves intended... (read more)

Reply
[-]Xachariah70

I went and made a new comment section because we broke 1000 posts and we're supposed to split at 500. Here's the link.

Reply
2TobyBartels
It's good to add links to the wiki page too (ETA: which I've now done), especially since HPMOR.com links there. (Although obviously it's better to create a new section and not add links than not to create a new section at all, so I voted you up.)
3Xachariah
Oh, I had forgotten about the wiki page. Thank you.
[-]Jonathan_Elmer70

I notice a disturbing similarity between what Dumbledore did with the note he left with the invisibility cloak and the actions of H&C 1. Dumbledore increased Harry's trust in him by having his motives impugned by a note that he then discredited. Dumbledor arranged for Zabini to achieved the highest possible pinnacle of untrustworthiness and then H&C arranged for Zabini to impugn the motives of Dumbledore to Harry's mentor.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific70

Even if it goes by "if you think you've witnessed death" there's still the matter that Hermione at no point thought that she witnessed Draco's death; it would have happened hours after she left.

Reply
[-]BlackNoise70

Sorry if this was mentioned before, but I just noticed something (not related to the latest cliffhanger):

It's implied that some people break into Azkaban to give some prisoners normal sleep/Patronus time, but why go to all the trouble when you can just tell a Patronus to go there for a few hours by itself. And we already know that a Patronus can travel into Azkaban (McGonagalls' in TSPE arc)

So, plothole?

Reply
[-]ArisKatsaris100

The trick of knowing how to send Patronuses to others as messengers has been implied to be kept in Dumbledore's close circle, as a tactical advantage. (e.g. Quirrel mentioning the possibility of Dumbledore teaching Harry this trick -- not as if it's public knowledge)

Reply
0rdb
Harry & Draco have learnt to send Patronus messages. With the goal of preserving Hermione unbroken while working towards her exoneration, Harry could * Arrange teaching of sending messages to any Patronus wielders in SPHEW/Sunshine or anyone else willing to help Hermione ** will confirm whether it is possible to maintain a Patronus at a distance for long periods * Arrange teaching of Patronus to those willing to help who don't know it. * Given the Cloak & Harry's Patronus hide those protected from Dementors, research Rituals/Potions to confer that ** An aim of Quirrel's? * Enlist help in finding evidence for Hermione's memory charming (Daphne noting she missed the Sunshine army council of war in 79).
3lavalamp
Yeah, I was wondering about this, also. Does Harry have to be physically present to destroy the dementors in Azkaban?
1DanArmak
Great point! However, in TSPE arc, when Harry had one of his emotional "I'll destroy all dementors right now" episodes after hearing just how Bella was used by Voldemort, he had to come up fast with rational reasons not to do it. And one reason was that it would not be maximally efficient to destroy the dementors while standing in a corridor in Azkaban, and it would be better to go himself to the central pit where they lived. So it should be much harder yet to destroy them from Hogwarts. Maybe not impossible, though. One at a time? But Dumbledore would immediately know that it was Harry doing it, and would stop him after only a few were destroyed, unless he managed to destroy them all in one go. And Harry's internal monologue in the same instance I referred to indicates that doing so would take so much life-energy it would kill Harry.
3lavalamp
I guess the question is whether it's Harry's location that matters or the location of his patronus.
3BlackNoise
Maybe what matters isn't the proximity of the caster but of the patronus itself. Though Harry might still not be able to send his 2.0 on a search&destroy mission while staying at Hogwarts. There seems to be a need for constant energy transfer into the patronus, and I doubt this transfusion line can go through hyperspace.
[-]buybuydandavis70

Madam Bones killed Narcissa. "Someone would burn for this." pg. 879 of the pdf.

EDIT: This is likely the double Taboo tradeoff. The original tradeoff was going along with the innocent Narcissa being burned as a war tactic or just covering up for the Aurors and Bones after they did it because he needed them - he was protecting his pieces for the larger war. Either way, it probably served his war aims to take credit for the attack and have Malfoy believe he was ruthless enough to do it. Mutual Assured Destruction.

The new taboo tradeoff is much the ... (read more)

Reply
[-]LucasSloan70

Dumbledore is a seasoned politician who may be assumed to know how to take the mood of the Wizengamot. However, he incorrectly predicts that they will not call for Hermione to be sent to Azkaban. Was his model of reality wrong or was he ignorant of a force on the board? I notice certain parallels to Quirrell's predictions about the Slytherin bullies.

Reply
7mjr
I think he just didn't want to believe that.
[-]LucasSloan160

"Are you all lost?" cried Albus Dumbledore. "She is too young! Her mind would not withstand it! Not in three centuries has such a thing been done in Britain!"

The leading article, written by some name that Harry didn't recognize, had called for the minimum age for Azkaban to be lowered, just so that the twisted mudblood who had defaced the honor of Scotland with her savage, unprovoked attack upon the last heir of a Most Ancient House within the sacred refuge of Hogwarts could be sent to the Dementors that were the only punishment commensurate with the severity of her unspeakable crime.

This is a definite break from the historical record.

Reply
5DanArmak
Indeed, they called for it before Lucius did. So did the newspapers, as noted below. I feel the hand of H&C continuing to guide events, and it's now clear that one goal of this plot is to maximize Harry's reaction...
2Vaniver
Why would Lucius call for it first? Even if he had to convince a confederate to call out for it, it would be beneath him to be the first to call for a girl to be sent to Azkaban.
1DanArmak
That's possible. But there's another possible explanation: that Lucius really intended to demand a lesser punishment - as he said himself, and as Dumbledore et al. had predicted - but changed his mind on seeing that he had broad support for a harsher punishment. Which would fit my theory regarding H&C, especially if H&C is Quirrel, who knows how Harry regards Azkaban.
[-]Vaniver110

Remember that Malfoy controls the Daily Prophet, which called for Azkaban before the trial began.

Reply
[-]loserthree70

Are you really comfortable putting "hurtful and/or stupid things written in a Potions textbook" in the same category as financial insecurity?

Yes, I am absolutely comfortable doing so. I'm talking about two children who have never been taught to communicate with intention, with raging adolescent hormones, and with typical teenage naïvete regarding bother their own emotions and those of others.

I don't have two high-school friends to rub together. The fact that I'm still in touch with one person from twenty years ago is the freak result of a wh... (read more)

Reply
6fezziwig
My apologies, I wasn't clear. I meant, pick two of your high-school friends when they were in high school. Or if you prefer, pick any two of "your kids", whatever that means to you, at an age when they'd been friends for at least five years. Not two kids who "aren't inclined" to get along, two kids who are. What, concretely, do you write to start them fighting? I see several straightforward ways to worsen an existing argument, but creating a new one, without either participant noticing the asymmetry, is much harder. No need to apologise; you don't know me. Without wanting to get too distracted by an argument over credentials: my involvement with teenagers in unending, God help me, but perhaps I do lack imagination. I'd observe in turn that you seem to have identified very closely with Snape's suffering, and have paid relatively little attention to Lilly's thoughts and feelings in this affair. That's when I noticed my confusion: I tried to model Lilly's half of this, and failed.
[-]Kendra70

Has anyone suggested yet that Aberforth was threatened with the aim to let Dumbledore "give in in blackmail"? I have never read it here before and it was my first idea, when I knew Aberforth was dead and heard Dumbledore saying the Deatheaters learned towards the end of the war he does not give in in blackmail.

Reply
1KnaveOfAllTrades
Boooooom.
[-]wedrifid70

I like most of the ideas but this one strikes me as only a small step up from horcruxing the most famous artifacts:

The concrete in a major public works project, like a large dam.

That sounds like the plot for a Nicholas Cage movie or a Matthew Reilly book.

Far better to settle for obscurity. Horcrux a non-precious stone and dump it in a random desert. Anything that you yourself couldn't guess at (specifically) if your clone was your enemy.

Reply
6bogdanb
Why a stone? Wouldn’t a grain of sand work? You can cover air, sea, desert, and with magic even space. I wonder if you could horcrux a molecule...
1wedrifid
I'm not sure what the size constraints are. All else being equal smaller does seem better. I'm also not sure what difference horcruxing something makes to the physical objects. They become near impossible to destroy, right? You might end up with the most seriously baddass helium molecule out there.
[-]Xachariah70

Frame Quirrell. (Assuming it's even framing and not accidentally getting the right answer for the wrong reasons.)

Harry knows he's an unregistered animagus. Harry has even better blackmail with Azkaban though he'd be loath to use it. People in universe also know that the defense professor is suspect #1.

Harry could just lie under veritaserum that Quirrell did all this. Nobody aside from Quirrell or Dumbledore would even imagine that Harry could do that (well, Snape and McGonagall). Way back in chapter 47, Harry said Bester thought Harry could beat verit... (read more)

Reply
4drethelin
Harry is certainly CAPABLE of framing Quirrel, but I don't think he's anywhere NEAR close to framing anyone he considers a friend. I think he's more likely to frame himself.
4erratio
Draco know that Harry can beat Veritaserum. And the chances are decent that he'll be well enough to attend the trial
5Xachariah
Draco only observed that Harry said he was an Occlumens. This was a line of thought that Draco wasn't particularly able to follow though on anyhow (since he didn't have the Veritaserum and didn't even know where to get it). He only abandons it when he realizes a more feasible test exists (via patronus). Keep in mind Draco's first impulse is that it was a complete lie, and he knows Harry (and what Harry can do) personally. Nobody else would believe an 11 year old would be an occlumens this young. Plus, Harry has enough evidence incriminating Quirrell to make any charge stick.
2Vaniver
Harry's tutor was arranged through Gringott's; I am sure that the goblins kept records. Whether or not they're obliged to show those records is another issue.
1DanArmak
Also, being an Occlumens can be proved directly to any Legilemens, so if Harry wants to prove it to someone it's not that difficult. Just difficult to do it on the spot without any preparation.
5see
From Chapter 27: So, if Harry wants to prove he's an Occlumens, he can. But if he is intending to lie under Veritaserum as part of a framing plot, he doesn't want to prove it; he wants to lie. And if he's gotten good enough at Occlumency over the last 50 or so chapters, he might be able to pull it off.
1Desrtopa
It might be too late for that. He told Draco that he's an occlumens, and it's highly probable that Lucius questioned Draco under veritaserum. Draco may already have told him, and if he hasn't, the fact that he could could undermine any plan hinging on it.
1DanArmak
I very much doubt Harry is already a perfect Occlumens. The last word we have on that is that he may grow to be one "in time". It would an unforeshadowed and plot-convenient superpower if he was suddenly revealed as such. Note: even a non-perfect Occlumens can apparently lie under Veritaserum, just not lie to a good enough Legilemens (even without Veritaserum).
0hairyfigment
Where did y'all get this? I had the vague impression that Veritaserum worked better to detect deliberate lying. Legilimency can detect other Legilimency better, because the potion doesn't do that at all. (And neither of them can detect Obliviation or a perfect Memory Charm, per Chapter 79.)
3pedanterrific
Waaay back in Chapter 47, we get:
0hairyfigment
Thanks, I'd remembered that wrong.
[-]75th70

Floo powder — Not tiring, can be used by unqualified wizards, but prone to error, and having a limited set of possible destinations.

Apparation — Highly flexible and requiring little setup time, but unpleasant, and only able to be performed by wizards of age.

Portkeys — Can be used to control the precise destination and time of teleporting, even to places where other modes of transport are forbidden. Can be used by unqualified wizards.

Side-along Apparation was a later invention by Rowling that negates some of the above logic and screws up some of her plots f... (read more)

Reply
9pedanterrific
Not sure about Side-Alonging, but apparently in MoR it's possible to apparate inanimate objects without a wizard going with them: Off-topic: when looking up previous instances of apparation I found something funny. Why does that sound familiar? Oh yeah:
975th
Yes, Eliezer made a great deal of noise in that Moody scene about the preposterousness of the whole Goblet of Fire plot. I happen to think it makes a good deal of sense if you use implicit clues elsewhere from the novels. Fudge starts to yell at Dumbledore in book 5 about creating an unauthorized Portkey on a whim. If it's illegal to do that, it stands to reason that either the Ministry or Hogwarts might be able to detect unauthorized Portkeys. So to get a Portkey near Harry surreptitiously, they had to cast a second Portus charm on an existing Portkey. The Triwizard Cup was supposed to be a Portkey to the maze entrance so as to declare the winner of the tournament. Crouch/Moody cast a second Portus on it to send Harry to the graveyard. Portus charms stack on top of each other, first-in first-out, so the second touch upon it activated the first charm, whose destination was the maze entrance. None of this is stated explicitly, but almost all of it is implied with various levels of directness.
5ArisKatsaris
That's, by the way, a rather obvious criticism for Goblet of Fire, which I think I've heard several times independently (before HPMoR was written) and I came up with it myself after I read the book. There are ways it can be made to make sense, as you say, but it's still highly criticisable that the readers need to invent justifications like "fake-Moody needed to hijack a preexisting Ministry-approved Portkey" when JKR herself could have done inserted such a sentence for explanation. It's still be a rather stupidly elaborate plot, mind you. Just not as preposterous as before.
5matheist
I also read a theory somewhere (can't remember where) that if, in canon, Voldemort had killed Harry in the graveyard as intended, he and his crew could use the portkey's return trip in order to wreak havoc upon Hogwarts; they can't just apparate in, and all the ministry officials would be trapped there for them to slaughter, without escape routes.
3pedanterrific
Uh, yeah. I was just remarking that Moody and Quirrell seem to have remarkably similar thought processes, right down to the denomination of coin used.
6drethelin
The idea is meant to be obvious, to anyone who's at all devious. I'd be more confused if they didn't both think of it. As far as denomination, it just makes sense to use the smallest coin.
2Joshua Hobbes
How about stealing one of the bazillion portkeys being used internationally to get wizards to the World Cup?
6loserthree
Quirrell has tossed things to people who caught it without thinking at other times in the story. One example is in chapter 70, in which he is holding what is alleged to be a S.P.H.E.W. button and responding to Hermione's explanation of what it takes to be a hero (specifically rather than ambition): In addition to questions about what that button might actually be and where it might come up later, including this current arc, there's the point that Quirrell doesn't seem to ever let anyone touch him. He does end up touching people in the Standford Prison Experiment arc, so it's not that he can't touch anyone. I expect it's just to cover for the fact that he really can't touch HJPEV.
4pedanterrific
I'm imagining him doing this a lot, for no real reason other than to amuse himself at the possibilities. I bet he's in the habit of using magic to catch things moving toward him, too. I thought that myself. (Plus I would expect him to be less than enthused about touching other people anyway.)
[-]pedanterrific60

Whenever someone commits cold-blooded murder their soul is ripped in two, even if the torn piece is not placed into a Horcrux. Not many people know this, but after speaking with Dumbledore Harry does.

No, Harry knows that Dumbledore said that he thinks this.

"I think, Harry - though you will call it only inference - that the act of murder splits the soul.

Reply
[-]Desrtopa60

Just because they don't expect her to be able to accomplish much with it doesn't mean that they wouldn't stop it as a matter of policy. You don't let a character witness walk up and hand anything to a prisoner on the stands without clearance.

A whole lot of plans proposed here seem to rely on the assumption that Harry can treat the Wizengamot as a captive audience who'll humor any attempt he makes to sway them or prove his points. The Wizengamot is a highly authoritarian court of law, and Harry is a first year student. They have little incentive to humor him about anything.

Reply
3Lavode
The blunt force way to play it is to just expecto patronum the dementor into oblivion and go "Would you like me to explain how I did that"? They would almost certainly make him do so, veritas serum, legimens and the whole nine yards. And once they know, they are fucked. I dont think the wizengamot would go for collective obliviation of the events of the trial, so once the cat is out of the bag, its not going back in.
2Desrtopa
I wasn't that happy with that plan to begin with, but the more I've thought about it, the more I've started to like the elegant simplicity of it. He'd get tremendous political turmoil, and possibly throw suspicion on himself with respect to the Bellatrix breakout, but he can still deny that, and they've got another suspect anyway. At the same time, he has a chance to sink Azkaban in one shot. I'm calling this one the Damn The Torpedoes Option. In his place though, I wouldn't necessarily encourage them to find out how I did it (he can resist veritaserum and leglimency,) but I'd tell them that it's already too late for them to stop the dissemination of the spell, thus rendering dementors and azkaban obsolete.
[-]gwern60

the reason probably wasn't so that Harry could say, "dementors are bad" again.

It could be there to highlight the moral bankruptcy of the Wizengamot and also mislead the readers into searching for a stereotypically heroic solution (vanquish the monster and rescue the fair-complexioned maiden!) when cleverness is called for.

Reply
2glumph
Indeed:
[-]Randaly60

A hypothesis: The ministry, large fractions of the ministry, or at least Dolores Umbridge, don't wind up being villians in this universe; they're also quasi-competent (on the level of canon Dumbledore).

Evidence:

a) Eliezer seemingly went to a fair amount of effort to demonstrate that both MoR!Harry and canon!Harry's thoughts were biased when regarding Umbridge- to the extent of naming the relevant chapter "The Horns Effect," and (IIRC) having this explicitly reference her

b) The Ministry seems to have gotten it right on convicting Sirius Black, ev... (read more)

Reply
[-]glumph100

c) The Ministry generally seems to be portrayed as fairly competent...

But I'm reminded of this exchange in Chapter 61:

Madam Bones's voice continued. "We brought in Arthur Weasley from Misuse of Muggle Artifacts—he knows more about Muggle artifacts than any wizard alive—and gave him the descriptions from the Aurors on the scene, and he cracked it. It was a Muggle artifact called a rocker, and they call it that because you'd have to be off your rocker to ride one. Just six years ago one of their rockers blew up, killed hundreds of Muggles in a flash and almost set fire to the Moon. Weasley says that rockers use a special kind of science called opposite reaction, so the plan is to develop a jinx which will prevent that science from working around Azkaban."

And there's the fact that interrogation under Veritaserum seems to constitute the entirety of serious criminal investigations.

Reply
1Fergus_Mackinnon
Considering how much of a threat technology can pose when combined with magic, one or more factions may have deliberately placed an ignorant pureblood into the position in order to keep knowledge of muggle developments marginal.
[-]pedanterrific150

It still says bad things that the Head of the DMLE thinks that Arthur "knows more about Muggle artifacts than any wizard alive" rather than, say, any random muggleborn or halfblood.

Reply
0Sheaman3773
Especially given how competently she's been portrayed in most other areas.
[-]pedanterrific60

In addition, he was just recently told

"It is clear, from the stories, that the Dark Lords who return by possessing another's form, wield lesser magics than they once knew. I do not think Voldemort would be satisfied with that. He would take some other avenue to life. But Voldemort was more Slytherin than Salazar, grasping at every opportunity. He would use his pitiful state, use his power of possession, if he had reason. If he could benefit by another's... inexplicable fury." Albus's voice had fallen to almost a whisper. "That is what I su

... (read more)
Reply
[-]75th60

Chapter 80 spoilers ho

One last comment and I'll stop spamming the page. It certainly seems as though Amelia Bones is highly connected to Narcissa's death now. I wonder if Dumbledore really has a reason for keeping it secret that's worth sending Hermione to Azkaban over.

Reply
[-]gwern120

I wonder if Dumbledore really has a reason for keeping it secret that's worth sending Hermione to Azkaban over.

It would discredit his entire side, their strategies, and their results, vindicating the opposite side. Oh, and obviously something would happen to Dumbledore like imprisonment, execution, exile, etc.

Reply
275th
No, it would mean something would happen to Amelia, not Dumbledore, which is much more of a fair trade for Hermione's life. I like pedanterrific's idea about an Unbreakable Vow being involved.
2gwern
Why does it mean it would happen to Amelia?
2pedanterrific
I think 75th is referring to this theory.
3pedanterrific
I don't know, to me that read kind of Unbreakable Vow-ish.
[-]75th60

CHAPTER 80 SPOILERS BELOW

Well. We have five days to think of something. This seems to mean that Harry will think of something, and we have five days to guess what it may be. Presumably it will be something in one of the following categories:

  • Something about Lucius Malfoy
  • Something about the Wizengamot
  • Something about the laws of magical Britain
  • Anything about some person or thing within range of his vision

I propose we start by making a list of everything in the courtroom:

  • Three Aurors
    • One of whom is named Gawain Robards
  • A dementor
  • Minerva McGonagall
... (read more)
Reply
[-]ArisKatsaris380

I'm pretty sure the solution is as follows (I've already posted it in TV tropes forum). I'm ROT13, if anyone still wants to figure it out: Yhpvhf Znysbl pynvzrq gb unir orra haqre Vzcrevhf ol Ibyqrzbeg. Ibyqrzbeg jnf qrsrngrq ol Uneel Cbggre. Sebz Serq & Trbetr'f cenax jr xabj gung xvyyvat gur jvmneq gung unf lbh haqre gur Vzcrevhf phefr perngrf n qrog. Erfhyg: Yhpvhf Znysbl naq rirel bgure Qrngu rngre pynvzvat gb unir orra vzcrevbfrq ner abj haqre yvsr qrog gb Uneel Cbggre. Ur pna fgneg erqrrzvat.

Reply
8pedanterrific
Point of order: vg whfg fnlf "n qrog", abg n yvsr-qrog. Also, it would need to be explained why no one ever thought of this before.
[-]gwern110

Also, it would need to be explained why no one ever thought of this before.

Yeah, I was going 'wow, that might actually work' and then it occurred to me that they already discussed whether they had any debts from Lucius they could call in. So unless this is so subtle that no one has ever called in such a debt before, someone must have been holding an idiotball.

EDIT: Logos01 suggests that the debt be invoked of all the Wizengamot members who also claimed to be Imperiused, to swing the vote on whether or not to convict. This might work, but I would personally dislike it as we have no idea how many such people there are.

Reply
9ArisKatsaris
Gurl qvfphffrq gur npghny qrogf, ohg gurl qvqa'g qvfphff guvf bar, abg rira nf n cbgragvnyvgl, fb V guvax vg qvq whfg fyvc gurve zvaqf, orpnhfr Uneel naq Qhzoyrqber qba'g oryvrir Yhpvhf gb unir orra haqre Vzcrevhf naq guhf gurl pbafvqre Ibyqrzbeg'f qrsrng gb or n oybj ntnvafg Yhpvhf, abg n snibhe gb Yhpvhf perngvat n qrog. Fb, lrnu, V guvax vg whfg qvqa'g pebff gurve zvaqf. Vg qvqa'g pebff zl zvaq rvgure gur jubyr cnfg jrrx, naq V jnf yrff ohfl (gubhtu yrff qrfcrengr sbe n fbyhgvba) guna Uneel be Nyohf jrer. Lrnu, vg qvq gnxr zr abj bayl 10-15 zvahgrf be fb sbe zr gb pbzr hc jvgu vg, ohg V unq gur fvtavsvpnag nqinagntr bs xabjvat gurer rkvfgrq n fbyhgvba, gung V unq orra tvira fhssvpvrag vasbezngvba fhssvpvragyl sberfunqbjrq, naq gung gur fbyhgvba zbfg yvxryl qrcraqrq ba gur ynjf naq phfgbzf bs zntvpny Oevgnva, nf gur ynfg cnentencu bs gur puncgre vzcyvrf.
2BlackNoise
Technically, the numbers don't have to work out - Lucius is the one on who's request the trial be held, If his debt can make him withdraw charges or clear Hermione's debt, that alone should suffice. Still, while this is a clever idea, it doesn't sound very "Taboo Trade-off" or "Think of the Wizengamot as individuals instead of wallpaper".
2gwern
You misunderstand, the point is there are 2 possible debt strategies; for one of them, the numbers do have to work out. I'd say Logos01's strategy exemplifies thinking of them as individuals, actually...
0Eugine_Nier
How about: invoke Lucius's life debt. Trade it for Hermione's.
2drnickbone
Great idea, but where's the Taboo Trade off?
0BlackNoise
Congratulations on correctly guessing (most of) the solution.
[-]Incorrect170

He alone spoke to defend Hermione, the man with a phoenix flaming bright upon his shoulder.

Don't forget the phoenix.

Reply
[-]gwern150

Context: Harry's dark side is amoral, destructive, will take any available option which leads to its target no matter how it may escalate or what the risks are, and cares about nothing else other than achieving regular Harry's current subgoal. (I'm convinced Eliezer regards the dark side as basically a UFAI.) Emphasis added:

...Harry plunged himself into his dark side...offering his dark side anything if it would only solve this problem for him

Who are the major players here that Harry can affect? Harry has no hold on the Wizengamot, as I pointed out any threat on Azkaban is more easily dealt with by attacking Harry.

So Dumbledore and Lucius are the keys. What can Harry do with Dumbledore - no matter the cost to Dumbledore, Harry, or anyone else - that would free Hermione? There's little he can testify to, as an Occlumens, so he can't even sacrifice himself (Lucius would refuse it), and it's not obvious how any of his magic 2.0 abilities could somehow convince the Wizengamot that Hermione is innocent or Lucius to let her go - what is he going to do, promise some more magic to an aristocrat who can buy all the magic he wants?

The answer is so obvious I'm surprised that no one seems ... (read more)

Reply
6Vaniver
That is the optimistic view of Dumbledore.
2anandjeyahar
It doesn't matter who was the real culprit as long as Dumbledore confesses. He's an occlumens and i would be doubtful if any legilimens can read his mind and find the truth.
2hairyfigment
Maybe I'm getting too attached to my own new solution. It does seem to me that getting Hermione to swear an Unbreakable Vow to seek vengeance on Narcissa's killer would work better. Lucius, we think, does not know what 'Harrymort' wants. If Hermione takes the Vow then Lucius will think he has the answer: "The Dark Lord's been setting up a way to take down Dumbledore, a way that looks like the work of D's own allies." Even if D kills his Muggle-born pawn, that would look suspicious and perhaps lead to his political destruction. Then the noble, grieving-but-honest Harry Potter steps into the vacuum?
2gwern
A Hermione in the hand is worth publicly backing down and 2 Unbreakable Vows in the bush.
1DanArmak
I read that as possibly saying he was half-way to turning Madam Bones, the real culprit, in.
4gwern
Bones isn't taking the attitude of 'don't turn me in, Albus, you owe me', but 'Albus, don't turn yourself in, you know it's the right thing but the consequences would be too bad'. At least, it's clear to me that Bones is not the bone to be thrown to Lucius.
7Bongo
Harry didn't hear Hermione's testimony. Therefore, he can go back in time and change it to anything that would produce the audience reaction he saw, without causing paradox.
6glumph
But since the audience's (extended) reaction includes voting to send Hermoine to Azkaban, how will changing her testimony help?
3aladner
If he could change part of the testimony to something demonstrably false, that no one else in the room knew at the time, he could prove that her mind had been compromised. Actually changing the memory would be a problem, and it doesn't seem like a likely solution to me, but it's still possible.
6Asymmetric
I was under the impression that we can actually influence the events of the story based upon how good our ideas are. If I may ask, Eliezer, are we trying to pick your brain for a True ending (something you have written already that we're trying to guess) or are we coming up with a Good one?
[-]Eliezer Yudkowsky110

In this case the True ending is already written, and anyone who comes up with a better solution than Harry would obviously win points.

Reply
[-]Logos01110

Here's mine:

  1. cold!Harry activates his Patronus charm, which depends on the wish to destroy Death, and therefore can be cast while "cold". This is done to disrupt the proceedings by destroying the Dementor. Since Harry never actually did this while at Azkaban, he wouldn't necessarily be associated w/ the prisonbreak of Bellatrix.

  2. In the confusion, Harry cloaks himself, and timeturns back an hour. This is done to give himself time to contemplate exactly what he needs to say and do. Sicne he will be cloaked, this preserves the secret of the Time turner.

  3. (version A) Immediately after destroying the Dementor, and the loop is closed, still-cloaked Harry takes advantage of his ability to get past any guards/defenses and whispers in Parseltongue into LM's ears: "No power can stop me. Even here in the Wizengamot I could reach you. If you do not relinquish your claim on Hermione your son is dead." IF LM doesn't understand Parseltongue, he would at least recognize it, and Harry could repeat himself in English.

  4. Harry Time turns again, and uncloaks in a side hall, intentionally getting himself seen during the same time that cloaked!Harry was threatening Draco's life (the

... (read more)
Reply
8Alsadius
The problem is, that plan relies on Harry realizing that Malfoy thinks he's Voldemort. I don't think he has the evidence to reach that conclusion.
5pedanterrific
You don't? I think he's already got it subconsciously: seemed a pretty clear reference to
[-]Alsadius100

We're talking about a kid who literally spoke a language designed for a different species without noticing.

Reply
3Logos01
... I genuinely didn't think of the Voldemort angle. That only sweetens the pot. I think that ArisKatsaris's solution is far more effective/elegant than my own. (Especially since it's foreshadowed by the part about how Harry thought of the Wizengamot as 'wallpaper' and that 'this would change'. -- that could be viewed as a dropped-hint that the solution lies in manipulating the votes. I can't think of another way Harry could achieve that than through the former Death Eaters.)
2pedanterrific
The entire arc is already written, is my understanding.
5Alsadius
* The Dementor is literally death. The "sword that has slain a woman and rope that has hanged a man" ritual will almost certainly summon one, but that's known Dark, and thus probably not something that can be used in the middle of a Wizengamot proceeding. And other than altering the punishment, how would this help? Even killing the Dementor outright will just make them mildly annoyed. * Dumbledore did (plausibly) burn Narcissa alive, and Potter saying so openly might be enough to swing something. It'd be unlikely to turn out well - Dumbledore would of course deny it, Potter's alliance would instantly be sundered, and unless Dumbledore wound up in jail, it wouldn't save Hermione. But, it might be tried. * The scarred man is likely Jugson, not Greyback. Isn't Greyback in Azkaban right now? Not a solution, but it should be noted. * If he's learned Avada Kedavra, there's always the option of blinding everyone with a super-Patronus and then committing mass murder until your side has a majority. Somehow, I don't see that one happening. * Snape and/or Quirrell(or someone else - Padma Patil would be a funny choice) comes to the rescue. Vanishingly unlikely, and hardly in keeping with the message of the story, but not strictly impossible. * Hermione figures out the super-Patronus, with Harry's prompting. This one is actually the least crazy of the lot, I think - the super-Patronus works on the principle of love for all human life. Someone who casts it ought to be damn near incapable of murder, and if the principle could be explained to the Wizengamot without ruining everything, the fact that Hermione managed it would actually constitute exculpatory evidence. It likely wouldn't be believed, but it's closer to possible than most of the others. As I said below though, these plans all share one common feature - they suck. I can't think of one that isn't either vanishingly unlikely or obviously stupid, and too stupid at that to be used even by a despairing child trying to
1Vaniver
Love of all human life does not translate into an inability to do math or unwillingness to murder. As well, it's not clear that guilty Hermione feels good enough about herself or all human life that she would be able to cast it.
1Alsadius
It's not a likely case, just less IMO unlikely than the others I listed. I'd put the odds at perhaps 10-20%. The rot13'd answer is the one I think is solidly the most likely.
0thomblake
You don't need that particular spell to commit mass murder. Harry would likely use transfiguration or napalm. That said, Harry-who-can-murder is not Harry-who-can-Patronus.
5Joshua Hobbes
We should also make an account Harry's capabilities * Can create a Patrunus 2.0 * Partial Transfiguration * Knowledge of Muggle Science * May have Lucius convinced that he is Voldemort * Is a part of the Prophecy, though only Dumbledore knows this * Is an almost-perfect Occlumens * Has non-public knowledge about Dumbledore and Quirrell
8Desrtopa
Not much use if he hasn't figured this out. If he is, I don't think we know this. He's at the stage of being able to block veritaserum, and thus probably to put up a block to stop anyone reading his mind, but I don't think we've been given any indication that he's reached the point of being able to show false thoughts to someone attempting to read his mind. I would add that he knows Voldemort is probably alive. If he were to testify by placing his memories into a pensieve, he could show that the Hogwarts inner circle has strong reason to suspect that Voldemort is alive and behind this plot. This might create a measure of doubt among the Wizengamot, at the cost of probably throwing the country into turmoil, so we can call this the Stupid Sentimental Hero Option.
5Vaniver
I find it odd that Harry made no attempt to contact Lucius, or that that attempt failed, before the trial. Your list is also missing Cornelius Fudge. The first thing that came to mind was declaring that Dumbledore killed Narcissa, but he doesn't have any evidence for that besides Draco's testimony, which is already fourth-hand. It is worthwhile to note that Harry is a member of a Noble House too, and so there may be some obligation of Draco to him (remember that time Draco 'tried to kill him' by dropping him off the roof, and he actually was in danger because of the mob of girls?) or Hermione to him (can't think of one there, though). But those don't seem like things that he could easily pull out in the Wizengamot after a vote has been called. I think the most likely outcome is that Harry does not, in fact, think of something. Hermione is sent to Azkaban, Draco is now his enemy, and Quirrel wins.
4loserthree
If this were the case, then good serial pacing would be to put that at the end of this installment, to leave on a clear down-note. Leaving it on a cliff-hanger promises some answer to the last question. By the text, it looks like that question is, "How will I save Hermione?" not, "Can I save Hermione?"
8Vaniver
Reality does not have to obey dramatic pacing. A central part of Eliezer's worldview is that it is possible to lose, and lose big. An Al-Ghazali can come along and destroy the bright future of your society. A UFAI can destroy the bright future of your society. A Quirrel can destroy the bright future of Harry Potter. If the fic is coming to an end soon, which I think has been implied, Harry's implosion and Quirrel's victory are a good place to end things. (I should clarify that, by "most likely outcome," I mean "more likely than any other specific outcome," not "more likely than its complement." I think there's more than half chance that Harry will think of something, and I think ArisKatsaris has proposed the most likely way Harry will get out of this, but still think it's somewhat more likely Harry will fail than win that way.
[-]JoshuaZ160

Chapter breaks are a meta-aspect not in the story itself. If it were a continual story this might make sense. Dramatic pacing of the story elements with a bad ending wouldn't be an in universe lesson but an out of universe lesson. Also, I suspect that Eliezer is smart enough to realize that having a downer ending would likely turn off a lot of people to rationality who might otherwise be take some interest in it simply from the halo effect. Having a downer ending would substantially undermine that.

Reply
7CronoDAS
What did Al-Ghazali do, exactly? Wikipedia isn't illuminating.
8Vaniver
I didn't read the wikipedia article fully, and so didn't notice that it only hinted at the primary reason he was important. The Islamic Golden Age, from ~750 to ~1250, was the period where Islam was the intellectual center of the world. Many Greek texts only survived because they had been preserved by Muslims and/or translated into Arabic, and scholars living in Muslim lands (Muslims, Christians, Jews, and atheists) were at the forefront of science, mathematics, and philosophy. Baghdad was the commercial and intellectual center of the world. Francis Bacon may have formalized the scientific method, but the main advance in empiricism before him came from al-Haytham, six hundred years earlier. Al-Ghazali was an influential thinker who said that the Greek philosophers were ignorant infidels and that science and mathematics were dangerous because they could lead to loss of faith. Ibn Rushd, famously depicted in the School of Athens, argued against Al-Ghazali- that the Greeks made valuable contributions, that science and mathematics were valuable. He was too little, too late; Muslim opinion swung Al-Ghazali's way, though a few Europeans took Ibn Rushd's arguments seriously, like Thomas Aquinas (who was also heavily influenced by Al-Ghazali, but agreed with Ibn Rushd's conclusions). Al-Ghazali, essentially, was the intellectual standard-bearer for the movement to replace openness and inquiry with closedness and faith in the Muslim world. He can't be entirely blamed for the collapse of the Islamic Golden Age, as both the barbarous Christians and Mongols were beating on the doors, but that Islam never really recovered as an intellectual force appears to be centered around him. (Neil de Grasse Tyson tells this story here (3:24), though he simplifies it somewhat.)
0Daniel_Starr
Is there a book you'd recommend on the thinkers of Al-Ghazali's time? The only one that came up for me in a quick Google on his name was a screed with all the hallmarks of cherry-picking history to support a point of view about present-day politics.
0Vaniver
I am not an expert in Islamic philosophy, but if I come across such a book I'll point it your way.
2Asymmetric
And yet, he did an entire arc about the role of a hero and supporting characters. I don't think we can be sure that his decisions won't be influenced by story concerns.
3Vaniver
Of course his decisions are influenced by story concerns: the way to make the point "this is not a story" is to do it in a sickening matter. Let people pattern-match on "this is the bleak moment where Harry will do the impossible and win," and then reveal that the impossible is, in fact, impossible. (Note there is a problem with the "you have five days to come up with a solution" approach if EY has taken this plan- EY would have to be pretty confident that no plan existed to hope that fans would not come up with one.)
2thomblake
I am impressed that you managed to avoid listing any of the members of the "crowd" as things in the courtroom.
2Manfred
I wonder where Quirrell has been all this time. Maybe he can show up to save the day.
275th
The obvious guess is that Harry will destroy the Dementor in full view of everyone. But this seems far too obvious for Eliezer to taunt us so. Harry knows nothing about the aurors, the Prophet reporter, Umbridge, Fenrir Greyback (if that's a correct identification), or Amelia Bones. That leaves * The dementor * Minerva * Lucius * Neville's grandmother * Himself The dementor he can destroy, but that's the obvious answer. Minerva he knows nothing shocking or incriminating about, and I can't think of anything that would help. Same goes for Madam Longbottom, I think. That leaves * The dementor * Lucius * Harry himself — Oh, and I forgot: Everything in Harry's pouch. What could Harry say about himself that's shocking? He could confess to his role in the Azkaban breakout, but I can't see how that would help Hermione. None of his scientific knowledge or magical discoveries would impress the Wizengamot, if they could even understand him. Does he know anything incriminating about Lucius? Well, he knows he was a Death Eater. But Harry is immune to Veritaserum and can't testify. Is there anything he can do about or with the dementor other than destroy it, which is far too obvious?
5pedanterrific
He might be able to do something fancy the same way he commanded a dozen of them to "Turn and go and do not speak of this to anyone" in TSPE. Maybe silently tell it to spread the word to its brethren that no Dementor is to go near Hermione? Which still leaves her stuck in a cold metal box for ten years, so it doesn't seem to help much.
4gwern
Maybe. On the other hand, he's in a hall of people who all strongly believe that Dementors would never do any such thing and will obey their commands.
5pedanterrific
So you're going with Harry's initial idea, that Dementors are controlled by expectations? If that's the case, then yeah, it probably won't work.
[-]ArisKatsaris60

Please be clear when you make a request of others. I honestly don't understand what you're asking for.

You have an argument about how probable Dumbledore is to have said that he burned Narcissa alive. But in the ancestor post, you're talking about readers "excusing" that, as if that's an observation both you and other readers shared, and the other readers merely choose to excuse him for it -- instead of just not making the same inference given the observations at hand.

And aren't you supposed to be linking the Sequences if you're telling me my

... (read more)
Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr60

I suggest: (1) all Harry needs is time, (2) Dumbledore refuses to give it to him, (3) Harry offers Lucius an Unbreakable Vow.

In theory, Obliviations and False Memories can be broken, right? So what's Dumbledore's excuse for not insisting on a delay in punishment long enough to attempt to break the alleged tampering with Hermione's brain?

[ETA: actually, doesn't matter whether the spells are known breakable; Harry could experiment with counterspells or just hunt for the real villain. Either way, Harry will be confident that he can get the truth -- given time... (read more)

Reply
[-]DanArmak110

Good ideas.

My thoughts:

  • Harry may be unable to talk to Lucius privately before the trial. If negotiations take place during the trial, that'll be an interesting scene.
  • Remember what each party sacrifices in an Unbreakable Vow. Lucius would sacrifice his ability to ever trust Harry again. Lucius may think this is not a problem, as he thinks Harry is Voldemort, but Harry may be hurt by this down the line. Also, they'll need to find a Binder who'll permanently sacrifice some of his magic to sustain the vow (are those routinely available for pay?)
  • Can the vow enforce factual claims about the past? E.g., "I vow that I am not Voldemort as you suspect", "I vow that I was always Draco's friend and am not to blame for the assassination attempt", etc. If yes - that is, Harry would be unable to Vow falsehoods - then he could convince Lucius of his goodwill. OTOH, if he actually tried to vow "I am not Voldemort", the result should be.. .educational.
  • The Vow can probably be engineered to enforce past-claims. E.g., "I vow to kill myself in one minute if this is not true: ..."
  • Harry has a lot to offer to vow that he values low (because he already wants to
... (read more)
Reply
4Xachariah
Yes. Presumably the person who bound the Auror Legillimancer did so out of pay rather than love. Additionally, Harry could just go find a dying wizard who wants to make some galleons since he's solved that problem. I'd assume that finding a binder is not an obstacle to people like the Malfoys.
1gwern
Should be able to, since enforcing honesty would seem to be on offer if ordinary Veritaserum can do as much... Now, the question is, does an Unbreakable Vow to tell the truth overcome obliviation/memory charming/pensieves etc? One might expect powerful sacrificial magic to be able to do that, but then again, if it did, you'd expect officials of some stripe to have such Vows as matters of course and we don't see that (on the gripping hand, wizarding society is not that efficient or imaginative).
7DanArmak
I would expect a Vow only binds you to tell the truth as you know it at that moment. Nevertheless: "I vow that to the best of my knowledge in the past XXX. I also vow that if I ever discover evidence that this is false and I had been Obliviated or Memory Charmed to enable me to make this vow today, I will come tell you all about it and submit to your judgement with a specified possible penalty." So you can at least bind yourself irrevocably to your new position. Of course not, the high-grade politician doesn't exist who could vow that they'd been honest upstanding citizens all their lives :-) If IRL we discovered a really reliable neurological lie detector, it would be used by police and courts, but do you really think politicians and CEOs would ever submit to it?
[-]lavalamp100

If IRL we discovered a really reliable neurological lie detector, it would be used by police and courts, but do you really think politicians and CEOs would ever submit to it?

If we did that, I think we would just end up selecting CEOs and politicians with firm self-deceptions instead of those who gave accurate information.

Reply
1Solvent
I think you may be being too cynical here.
4lavalamp
I'm being too cynical about... politicians? ...Maybe I need to move to wherever you live...
3Solvent
I'm just saying that making lying extremely more difficult is also likely to cut down on lying. The advantage which you'd have to get from lying would have to be higher than the current threshold to bother.
2gwern
I'd expect some CEOs would submit to it and their stock would be rewarded for it.
1Jello_Raptor
To boot, I would be very surprised if people elected politicians who hadn't submitted to the lie detector after it had the cultural time to sink in. People with foresight would work very hard to discredit it before that happened though.
1loserthree
We might not know if they already had.
4pedanterrific
Where'd you get this idea? As far as I know, the last word we had on that was That doesn't sound like it's possible even in theory to detect, let alone remove, Obliviations or False Memory Charms.
1Daniel_Starr
I was reading the quote you cite as "too much trouble usually" rather than "absolutely impossible", because canon indicates that both can be removed, albeit not easily: http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Memory_Charm http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/False_memory_charm
2pedanterrific
I just realized- if Obliviation can be broken, Harry (but not Quirrell) is implicated in the Azkaban breakout.
0hairyfigment
It seems more natural to have Hermione take an Unbreakable Vow to seek vengeance on Narcissa's killer (ideally with qualifying clauses). This, in principle, would seem attractive to Lucius even or especially if he can't reconsider his theory about Dumbledore (or any of his other beliefs). And I vaguely feel Lucius would worry less about Hermione tricking him than if Harry/Voldemort took the Vow. In any case, this approach to vengeance seems directly related to the trade Lucius publicly declared he would make in chapter 80. This suggestion might work better coming from Draco's snake-Patronus. They might even get away with adding some lawyer's conditions then. Sadly, it sounds like Harry couldn't signal Draco unobtrusively unless he slips away somehow (or, I guess, casts Expecto Patronum into his Invisibility Cloak while muffling the sound). But the time-turner could work here. I was going to say that even a brief disappearance might make L. Malfoy suspicious. But if LM sees him as Voldemort, that would make faking a Patronus intuitively unlikely.
[-]glumph60

Snape didn't make an Unbreakable Vow to protect Harry. He makes one with Narcissa in the sixth book, promising to help Draco in his plot to kill Dumbledore. But Snape's protection of Harry in canon is always grounded in his love for Lily.

Reply
4AspiringKnitter
Huh. I just reread that scene in Deathly Hallows after you mentioned it and you're absolutely right. I was sure I remembered an Unbreakable Vow in that scene. I wonder what else I could be misremembering... O.O Scary thought.
[-]ArisKatsaris60

Not quite. I don't disagree that they were from the start supposed to be from the same individual, nor that 'Santa Claus' was meant to show Harry they were the same individual. It's just that the first letter was not signed 'Santa Claus' and Harry says it was. This is a mistake on either Harry's or Eliezer's part, (with a lesser hypothesis being that the inaccuracy was a deliberate minor ploy on Harry's part - but that's a bit unlikely and silly)

Reply
1Swede
Maybe he states them as both being signed 'Santa Claus' just because it's simpler to do so. After all, in Harry's mind the author of each note is very likely the same person, so the two notes may as well have both been signed 'Santa Claus'. It potentially saves the time of having to explain (what is to him) a foregone conclusion. Whether or not that's a detail Harry would normally skip is up to you I guess. Of course it could just be an authorial mistake. But I'm willing to give Eliezer the benefit of the doubt on a minor point like this.
8ArisKatsaris
Ugh. That's possible too, I guess, but it'd be rather hypocritical on Harry's part given how insistent he is, in the very same conversation, about clearly distinguishing between observation and inference.
[-]DanArmak50

Maybe not to others, but he himself would know Harry had broken Bella out of Azkaban and then lied to him about it. He would definitely force Veritaserum or Legilimency on Harry to find out the complete truth of what happened that day.

In fact, that's a point I haven't considered before. Why haven't Quirrel offered to Obliviate Harry of that day's events, maybe using a Pensieve first? This would protect them both a lot. It makes no sense if what Quirrel wanted was the lost lore of Slytherin that Bella might possess, or even Bella herself for some unknown purpose. But it makes perfect sense if Quirrel just wanted Azkaban to produce the emotional effect that it did on Harry. As a sort of prerequisite for this trial of Hermione.

Reply
2pedanterrific
That would require bringing someone else in on the secret. Quirrell can't cast magic on Harry directly, remember?
2ahartell
Obliviate the third party afterwards?
0DanArmak
The third party doesn't need to know what the memories being obliviated are. Just that they're being paid to obliviate everything that happened that day, and that they will be obliviated themselves of this act immediately afterwards.
0pedanterrific
Yeah, in retrospect that's not really much of an impediment- he could just Imperius, say, Sprout into Obliviating Harry, then Obliviate her.
0Logos01
Why bother? It's been made clear that people with mental powers are commercially available. Remember Harry's Occlumency instructor.
0Logos01
Harry is an Occlumens. Neither of these strategies would work.
0DanArmak
Legilimency would work, he's not a perfect Occlumens yet.
4pedanterrific
The distinction is that perfect Occlumens can show false thoughts to a Legilimens; regular Occlumens, of which Harry is one, are perfectly capable of blocking Legilimens from learning anything, they just know they've been blocked.
0Sheaman3773
We know that Occlumens can project the persona of a rock in order to thwart Legilimency. Do we also know that there is no brute-force method for getting past the defenses?
0DanArmak
I was wrong, then. Thanks. Hmm.
[-]linkhyrule550

FIrst, your grammar is poor, and you abuse run-on sentences, making your idea a pain to read.

Second, it is unnecessarily convoluted. All you really had to say was "Harry retroactively implicates Lord Jugson by using his wand, and clears Hermione's and Draco's."

The problem, of course, is that presumably H&D's wands have already been checked.

Reply
1Pringlescan
Fair enough.
[-]thescoundrel50

Just a piece, but one I haven't seen discussed- why has no one done a Priori Incantatem on Hermione's wand? We know harry knows about it, from clear back in chapter 13:

"Priori Incantatem," said Sprout. She frowned. "That's odd, your wand doesn't seem to have been used at all." Harry shrugged.

I don't know if this is part of Harry's plan, but it is certainly a line of investigation that has not been followed. There is always the possibility that whoever did the memory charm used Hermione's wand to cast the blood chilling hex, but once down that track Harry can start eliminating suspects for the memory charm.

Reply
4glumph
Even if that test is performed and it is proven that Hermoine's wand was not used to cast the Blood-Cooling/Chilling Charm, Lucius et al. will simply claim that Hermoine stole another student's wand before the duel.
9pedanterrific
That seems like relevant information, though.
5thescoundrel
Yes, but we have now found a thread that we can pull on to start establishing a true map. The truth is entangled- so then we find the student whose wand was stolen, or we start testing the wands of our prime suspects. At the very least, we have introduced an inconsistency in the story- when would Hermione have had the chance to steal a wand? Draco called this dual- are we to now believe that Hermione showed up believing she would be defeated and stole a wand in advance, so she could kill Draco? I don't know if this is enough to forestall the vote, but it certainly is an avenue curiously absent from Harry's thoughts, especially when he is so focused on trying to prove Hermione's innocence- if his Super Dark Side can find this in his memory, I find it hard to believe it would not be of use.
2Luke_A_Somers
And if her wand did it? Quite possible, but it wouldn't help.
2thescoundrel
I phrased that poorly- if her wand wasn't used, then it goes a long way to clearing her name. If it was, then Harry starts tracking down suspects, in order to find the wand that made the memory charm. Either way, its an investigation tool that still hasn't been used.
1pedanterrific
Wait, it actually says that? Oops- Priori Incantatem is the brother-wand effect from GoF, the investigative spell is Prior Incantato.
[-]BlackNoise50

Actually, its a bad decision with respect to the information you had when you made it, unlike one-boxing instead of two-boxing, you can't have expected to win the lottery.

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr50

Harry can save Hermione by offering false testimony against Quirrell. There's a taboo social tradeoff. The odd thing is that he has to do it by telling lies about Quirrell that we know are mostly true.

Harry can give false testimony under Veritaserum, because he's an Occlumens, which of those present only Dumbledore and McGonagall and the Malfoys know (and the Malfoys wouldn't be believed).

So, what can he falsely testify that would save Hermione?

  • That he himself tampered with Draco and Hermione's memories. But he'd better have one heck of an escape planned
... (read more)
Reply
[-]Eneasz50

They had to be, in order for Hermione to be MuggleBorn. Mendelian pattern.

Reply
[-]Jonathan_Elmer50

There has been some speculation that Snape is H&C, but what has been lacking as far as I can tell is motive. I may have one. Cannon Snape was a Death Eater who only came over to Dumbledor's side because he wanted to try to save Lilly and then stayed on his side in order to help protect Harry out of respect for Lilly's sacrifice.

However, in chapter 27 Snape has a conversation with Harry and Snape says that he almost killed harry due to the degree that he was offended and that he gained a new understanding of what Lilly saw in Harry's father. If Snape r... (read more)

Reply
[-]Xachariah50

As counter-proof, a person's Animagus form is supposed to represent an aspect of their personality or what they want to be. There are only two characters whose corporeal patronus and animagus forms are shown to us. McGonagall (both in canon and HPMoR) is a cat animagus and has a cat patronus charm. James Potter (in canon) is both a stag animagus and has a stag patronus. In HPMoR Hermoine already knows what her patronus would be if she could make one; she says Otter and in 4 years later in canon she creates an Otter patronus. This would imply that anyo... (read more)

Reply
7[anonymous]
I would expect that if Snape became an Animagus, he would not turn into a female deer.
2Xachariah
I would have never expected Snape to have a doe Patronus either. Additionally, I wouldn't expect Dumbledore to have a phoenix Animagus form. Although I suppose if anyone had a phoenix as their Animagus it would be him; he is a master of transmutation. There are not many data points to consider. In canon, there were only 7 registered Animagi in the entire century (though hilariously four unregistered Animagi canon!Harry knows about). At such a low sample size it could be coincidence or just the simple matter of liking an animal so choosing it as both your Animagus and Patronus form. I do weight my quoted theory as marginally probable, maybe 70% at best.
[-]Alsadius50

I'll admit, a big part of my reason for that belief is narrative causality - I would not find this evidence convincing in an open world, but in the context of a fictional story, it fits a little too neatly for coincidence. It's obvious that Harry is going to move out of Dumbledore's camp at some point - their worldviews differ too strongly - but this would make an absolutely beautiful cause for the split.

And yes, "I don't give in to intimidation" is a good start for getting people to stop threatening you, but "...and if you try, I'll start ... (read more)

Reply
[-]DanArmak50

He may leave briefly for the trial, but unless a move is made at that precise moment, in general I think he's going to hunker down inside his fortress of Hogwarts, defend it more tightly, and search it for Voldemort's soul more thoroughly.

The whole trial can't have been set up just to get him out for a few hours; there must be other important Wizengamot votes that he as Chief Warlock (and important political figure) must attend. He must leave Hogwarts regularaly for a few hours at a time for that reason.

On the other hand, he may routinely loop back with his Time Turner to cover up these absences, including Hermione's trial, so that there is always a Dumbledore in Hogwarts...

Reply
4pedanterrific
There must always be a Dumbledore in Hogwarts? June is coming doesn't have quite the same ring to it.
1buybuydandavis
I'm thinking more about him having to leave if Harry raises a ruckus somewhere. Like the Azkaban breakout.
[-]pedanterrific50

Dedalus Diggle?

Reply
[-]matheist50

It wasn't Snape's choice to humiliate Hermione publicly — that was Dumbledore's decision, making use of Snape's "evil potions master" persona. Note that none of the other professors speak up, except for Quirrell, who is a temporary hire and need not follow Dumbledore's direction. Minerva doesn't even show up, presumably so that she doesn't have to sit and keep her mouth shut.

Dumbledore explains to Harry in chapter 77 that Hermione had to be seen to lose publicly in order to de-escalate the conflict with Slytherin. Dumbledore doesn't actually know... (read more)

Reply
3Eugine_Nier
I suspect it's because we wanted SPHEW to really go after bullies and wasn't a competent enough plotter to foresee what would happen.
[-]Vladimir_Nesov50

The dictionary attack by H&C on Hermione happened months before Hermione defeated Draco.

The attack depicted in Ch. 77 was clearly recent, after the events of the SA sequence.

Reply
1DanArmak
Oops, sorry, my bad. I was thinking of H&C's first appearance. But it was still before Hermione defeated Draco publicly.
[-]Spurlock50

Meta: everyone seems to have started using the term "Groundhog's Day Attack" to describe what H&C did to Hermione. While I understand what happened in the story, I've never heard this term before, can't find any relevant looking results by googling, and don't see what the connection could be between brute forcing someone's mind and using a small furry animal to predict the changing of the seasons. Can someone please point me in the right direction here?

Reply
[-]glumph130

This was addressed in the previous thread:

The movie 'Groundhog Day' is about a man who relives the same day over and over again repeatedly. Because the day is reset, he is able to re-play each interaction with any person repeatedly until he can convince them of whatever he wants or work around them ...

In chapter 77, H&C performs a similar hack. He tries to convince her, then obliviates her memory and uses his gained information to convince her even more, etc. Instead of resetting the day, he is resetting her mind back again and again.

Reply
3taelor
It's a reference to the the 1993 movie Groundhog Day in which Bill Murray's character is forced to live through numerous iterations of the eponymous day.
1NihilCredo
Here
[-]Joshua Hobbes50

if the obvious answer is incorrect, we ought to figure out which Hogwarts staff-member has been going around casting memory charms.

Reply
[-]ArisKatsaris50

Harry in ch.79 claims that both notes were signed "Santa Claus" but in chapter 14 the note is explicitly unsigned (though it mentions Christmas).

This may have been a thematic demonstration of the faultiness of memory, a crucial topic of chapter 79, but currently it feels to me more like an authorial mistake. If the mistake was deliberate on the part of the author, I think a (3rd person-omnicient) narrative note could be edited in chapter 79 to note this failure of Harry's memory in passing.

Reply
[-]Joshua Hobbes50

Eliezer ought to add a forum section to HPMOR.com

Reply
[-]orthonormal200

I think that having Less Wrong host the almost-official HPMOR forum (i.e. the one on which Eliezer sometimes comments and sometimes asks for translation help) is a very good thing for Less Wrong in terms of attracting new people. Since Eliezer thinks that's a good thing, I expect him not to add an official HPMOR forum anywhere other than Less Wrong.

Reply
[-]loserthree100

The authors notes name the direct readers to the thread on TV Tropes for discussion, and to Less Wrong for the Sequences. The author also posts in the thread on TV Tropes.

Also, a successful forum would increase traffic to the hpmor.com by a very large amount. The potential for increased cost may not fit the plan for whoever provides that host.

Reply
4orthonormal
Good point. My Bayes-score takes a hit.
1Joshua Hobbes
That makes sense. Perhaps not an actual forum, but something more similiar to FF.net's reviews? Not for discussion, but for feedback.
[-]DanArmak40

In chapter 50, in Mary's room before leaving on the Azkaban mission:

Professor Quirrell gestured for the door to close and lock, and began to speak twenty-nine security Charms, one of the ones in Mr. Bester's sequence being left out this time, which somewhat puzzled Harry.

Quirrel casts the full 30 charms during their previous secret talk in Mary's room (a week before), and he casts all 30 charms when they reach the warehouse (before entering Azkaban).

So, anyone have an idea what this is about?

Reply
2moritz
Maybe one of the charms protects against time-traveling in and out of the room?
2Joshua Hobbes
IIRC, The two security charms we specifically know about are those to check for powerful artifacts and Animagi. Now, we know that Harry's Invisibility Cloak is apparently never detected by the former spell, so I suspect that anything in Harry's bag is not detectable by these means. Therefore, I propose that Quirrell left either a small Animagus or Magical Artifact in Harry's bag when he entered as a serpent. As to why specifically he'd do that, I don't think we have enough information to speculate.
0pedanterrific
Refresh my memory: how do we know this?
1Pringlescan
Actually if I remember correctly during the bully final showdown Hermoine gets scared because she recognizes one of the charms as one that would detect Harry's cloak in the area if not find it directly.
0pedanterrific
Yes, but Harry's Cloak wasn't anywhere near there, so...
1Pringlescan
Fully two dozen different Charms must have been spoken, then, but no more invisible people showed up. One of them in particular made Hermione's heart sink; she recognized it as the Charm which had been listed alongside the description of the True Cloak of Invisibility, which would not reveal the Cloak, but would tell you whether it or certain other artifacts were nearby. To clarify when I said 'actually . . . .' i meant to disprove that assertion not support it.
0pedanterrific
Edit in response to your edit: You lost me. The example you gave was not an instance of Harry's Cloak being detected or not-detected, so it doesn't prove anything one way or another.
0Joshua Hobbes
Harry would have noted if an alarm went off or the cloak started glowing or buzzing or whatnot. That would be the way an ancient artifact would be revealed, right?
2pedanterrific
I assumed the caster of the spell silently becomes aware of the fact "there is an artifact nearby". I guess it might be possible it sounds an alarm instead, but that would require that mokeskin pouches can beat artifact-detecting spells, which seems unlikely.
1linkhyrule5
My bet, honestly, is that the Cloak of Invisibility laughs at artifact-detecting spells.
2Joshua Hobbes
0linkhyrule5
1pedanterrific
Which raises the question of what the last two Charms in the set of thirty are; but the clear implication is that the spell that would detect the presence of the Cloak of Invisibility is part of the "twenty-three checks" which he performs on other occasions in Harry's presence.
0Joshua Hobbes
I'm fairly certain that's how detection spells work though. In Deathly Hallows there were blaring alarms when the gang apparated into Hogsmead.
1glumph
That was actually called the Caterwauling Charm, though. There's another detection spell in DH: Hominem Revelio. The only known effects of this spell are (i) the 'swooping sensation' experienced by a detected person and (ii) the lack of any alarm when nobody is detected. It's likely, however, that there is no alarm even when persons are detected; when it's used against Harry, Ron, and Hermoine by Death Eaters there is no alarm mentioned in the text.
1pedanterrific
If this is directly explained somewhere, I can't find it. I see two possibilities- something to do with leaving the room via travelling back in time, or something to do with their future versions getting back in the room immediately after they leave.
5Percent_Carbon
Their future persons are in that room, under the Invisibility Cloak. The skipped one is the one that detects it, because it's awkward to interact with your future self. It's a clue to readers who haven't read the whole arc, yet, of what all Quirrell plans are.
0Jonathan_Elmer
In the next thread Xachariah pointed out that Quirrel likely has possession of the resurrection stone and was very recently(at that point in the story) told by Harry how to identify it. Given Locke's observation in his reply that one of the two privacy spells that have been identified is to detect powerful artifacts it would make sense that Quirrel omitted the spell to detect power artifacts because he had the resurrection stone in his possession. I am not sure why the resurrection stone would be useful for the mission, but surely Quirrel could find something interesting to do with it in that context. There has also been some speculation that Harry's fathers's rock is the philosophers stone. I am not sure why people would be storing important artifacts on Harry's person, but it would be hilarious to find out that Quirrel stored the resurrection stone in Harry's pouch while he was in there.
[-]pedanterrific40

As far as I know we have no indication that Lucius is capable of casting the Patronus Charm at all. Or are you referring to the scene where Harry teaches Draco how to send messages with it?

Reply
0Incorrect
The latter. Wait why would Harry teach Draco a secret trick belonging to Dumbledore's close circle?
3pedanterrific
He just came up with the idea independently.
0Normal_Anomaly
Or at least he saw that it could be done and independently came up with how.
[-]CronoDAS40

Taboo tradeoff...

Is there a way that Harry could simply buy Hermione's freedom? Harry is, among other things, rich.

Reply
9Dreaded_Anomaly
Lucius says, in Ch. 80:
0CronoDAS
Good catch.
8Joshua Hobbes
From Lucius Moneybags-For-Testicles Malfoy?
2CronoDAS
Sure, why not?
8Joshua Hobbes
Because Lord Malfoy would absolutely refuse. That is painfully obvious.
[-]glumph40

But nobody thinks Hermoine actually committed murder; the charge is attempted murder.

Reply
[-]Alsadius40

There's dozens of wizards there - surely at least one was a Hufflepuff.

Reply
[-]Vaniver40

Break the line of Merlin, using partial transfiguration. This would almost certainly be seen as Merlin himself expressing extreme displeasure from beyond the grave.

Given that Dumbledore is on Hermione's side, I'm not sure that destroying his badge of office would be a helpful move.

Reply
5gwern
Fantasy precedents say that when a badge of office is destroyed, it's a comment on the unworthiness of the officiant, and not some associated body For example, Saruman's staff ('line'?) in Lord of the Rings is broken as a comment on his own moral failings, and not, say, the Council that Saruman the White used to head.
2wedrifid
(And the wands of people like Hagrid. And the hat of that guy in Mary Poppins.
4Atelos
If the enchanted stone that the Line is made of is subject to Harry's power of partial transfiguration then instead of breaking the Line he could take a piece of the chamber and make it into a new Line for himself. 'Merlin's spirit and Magic itself have endorsed me, now actually LISTEN to what I have to say.' ETA: Or, since a few months ago in Azkaban he had enough power/skill to make quite a large hole in the walls and he's presumably improved further since then, and still assuming that partial transfiguration isn't one of the things the special stone is protected against, he could reshape a portion of the wall to say "Release Her". 'The stones themselves cry out against the injustice of this!'
[-]Asymmetric40

We need a new discussion thread. Anyone want the dubious honor of making it?

Reply
[-]glumph130

If a new thread was necessary, it should have been created before the new chapter was posted. As it is there are already dozens of posts about Chapter 80 here; a new thread would split the discussion.

Reply
8Percent_Carbon
So, Tuesday? Say, at 5:00 pm Pacific?
[-]LucasSloan40

Quirrell did, I don't think that Harry knows the spell that Quirrell used.

Reply
[-]malderi40

By the end of chapter 80, I think I would have stood up, looked Lucius in the eye, and destroyed the dementor in full view of everyone.

Reply
2AspiringKnitter
That seems implausible. Most people probably think they wouldn't shock someone to death if ordered to. At least if it isn't Azkaban, and it isn't death outright, it's probably not as bad as either, though. So if he can discredit Azkaban as a place to put criminals, that would improve things. Minimally.
[-]TimS40

Both recessive magic-gene carriers. That's the definition of Sqib in MoR - or have I got this wrong?

Reply
2WrongBot
Fair enough. The canon definition of a squib is specifically a non-magical child of wizarding parents. I'd assumed the Grangers had wizarding blood further back than that, making them genetically identical to squibs but not meeting the definition of the term as used in wizarding culture.
[-]loserthree40

What would it mean for the story if Lesath Lestrange was actually Lesath Riddle by blood?

Reply
1DanArmak
He might lose his claim to inherit the vast Lestrange fortnue stored at Gringotts? I don't remember, the Lestrange and Black intermarried family trees are complex...
[-]ntijanic40

Hypothesis: original (probably Latin) incantations were aliased to "Wingardium Leviosa" and similar because it was easier for Hogwarts students to learn.

Evidence:

  • Powerful wizards still use some Latin spells. Perhaps only up to 7h year magic was aliased?
  • We did not see any non-English wizards cast spells yet. It's likely (and fits into the setting) there are other syntaxes.
  • Due to the Interdict of Merlin, it's possible the Latin alternatives are lost.

The aliasing could be common knowledge among wizards, but not muggleborns. That could explain ... (read more)

Reply
6rdb
Last night Damian Conway talked about Lingua-Romana-Perligata as part of his "Fun with Dead Languages" talk. He makes the point that Latin's suffixes don't constrain the word order. Given Harry's dream of destroying Azkaban and Dumbledore in Ch 79 muttering strange incantations that sounded not quite like Latin and echoed in their ears in an unusually creepy fashion, maybe Latin provides a larger space to search for a mnemonic phrase that the Source of Magic will match and action, than languages with a more constrained grammar.
[-]pedanterrific100

There's also

"Um..." Harry said. "If there are any spells you can cast to make sure no one's listening to us..."

Professor McGonagall stood up from her chair, firmly closed the outer door, and began taking out her wand and saying spells. [...]

Professor McGonagall finished a spell that sounded a lot older than Latin, and then she sat down again.

Not to mention the Sumerian Simple Strike Hex. Mahasu doesn't sound much like Latin.

Reply
5loserthree
I believe it's meant to be Sumerian
0Desrtopa
Given Harry's experiments with his Bag of Holding at the beginning of the story, it seems that magic recognizes the meanings of words irrespective of whether the speakers actually know what they mean, and it doesn't have to be any particular language. I suspect that the spells mostly sounded meaningful to people of various languages throughout history the way "wingardium leviosa" sounds like a levitatey sort of spell to an English speaker.
[-]pedanterrific40

It's APWBD, not APBWD.

Reply
2WrongBot
Thank you. Alas, my credibility shall be forever tainted.
5pedanterrific
Nah, if you didn't make mistakes now and then your name wouldn't make any sense. See: me.
[-]Asymmetric40

This thought just occurred to me: would Harry think to check the phoenix's price chamber for a picture of Narcissa Malfoy? If it is not there, how strong is it as evidence against Dumbledore immolating her?

Reply
9Anubhav
In other words, it's weak enough to disregard completely.
6AspiringKnitter
Not very. Maybe he only has shrines to his fallen allies. If there are memorials of other fallen enemies/neutrals, then it would be evidence, but I'm not sure how strong it would be... Plus, if she was an innocent who died because of an accident that was his fault, a memorial would be more likely than if he had nothing to do with it, so...
1Jello_Raptor
On the other hand, if it is there (a highly unlikely situation) it would be immense evidence that it wasn't Dumbledore, or at the very least that it was an accident of some sort. But this is mostly useless speculation given what we know.
4hairyfigment
I was thinking the exact opposite. If he enshrines "my closest friends, and those who died of my worst decisions," then someone he burned to death seems more likely to fit in the latter category than someone who died for other reasons. If, say, Voldemort killed Narcissa to manipulate Lucius and/or to amuse himself, then I'd expect Dumbledore to regret this death but not to rank it among those he regrets "most of all". I did neglect the possibility that she was working for Dumbledore somehow. I probably shouldn't, since that would increase the probability of Mor!Voldemort killing her in this way.
[-]gwern40

However, since Hermione was terrified to see the (presumed) real face of H&C... The obvious solution seems ever more obvious. (And Word of God practically confirmed it!)

Where does Eliezer 'practically' confirm it?

Reply
1DanArmak
OK, not as much as I seemed to imply. You're right to call me on it (will edited parent comment). I was thinking about the Author's Notes for the last two chapters talking about how readers disregard the obvious interpretation, how sometimes when something's clear enough there isn't a twist waiting to be revealed, etc. For some reason when I wrote the comment above, my brain turned that (plus the confirmation of a Quirrel-Voldemort connection) into "confirmation of a Quirrel plot behind current events". Sorry.
[-]Lavode30

I just realized something. The wizarding world has a strong Taboo against the free sharing of information. Harry has an entire hieracy of explosive insights he can read into the wizengamots records untill they let Hermonie go to get him to shut up Okay, this actually needs him to bluff about having a fallback that publishes if he perishes, but consider:

If he tells them about the true patronus and the true nature of dementors, the regular patronus stops working. This destroys askaban.Not enough?

If he explains the silver / gold arbritage scheme the economy o... (read more)

Reply
[-]DanArmak100

untill they let Hermonie go to get him to shut up

Or until they hit him with a Quietus to shut him up. Much simpler.

Reply
4Carinthium
The trouble is that from the typical wizard's perspective this doesn't work- they're much more likely to irattionally dismiss it as the babblings of a desperate child.
1pedanterrific
Harry doesn't even know Alchemy exists as a discipline, as far as I know. Or are you thinking of Potion-Making?
0Sniffnoy
Do we know that the Wizengamot's records are public knowledge, and that he can say whatever he wants while speaking before the Wizengamot? I assume they at least have some procedure to close discussion against a speaker's will.
0Lavode
They dont need to be public - a roomful of aristocrats are exceedingly unlikely to submit to collective obliviation, and there are enough people and enough factions present that anything they all hear is not going to stay secret. There are tradeoffs here - he can spill the beans on the dementors and the true patronus and probably come out with his reputation strengthened if he plays it right, - Patronus the dementor in the room out of existance, and then letting the wizengamot "compel" an explanation out of him would be wieved as the wizengamot shooting itself in the foot, so that leaves hims smelling like roses. Escalating the strategy of "Tell the wizengamot things they dont want to know" beyond that is going to make him very unpopular very quickly, as the wizarding world is very heavily committed to information control, but it is an option.
[-]Xachariah30

I had a long post enumerating things, but it can be replaced with this: A power only provides you with an advantage if the other side doesn't have it; a power only provides you with an unexpected advantage if the other side is unaware of it.

This is the Wizengamot. Worst case, the majority of the people here probably have time turners, best case, enough people know about them that you couldn't keep time travel secret. The DMLE has protocols about how to use time travel, which means it's known to the ministry. Time travel would not be a sufficiently unexpected advantage.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific30

Well, why not? Maybe it's the departing soul of the victim yanking on the murderer's that causes the split. Do you know something I don't?

Reply
[-]Alsadius30

I find it fascinating that nobody has yet considered the thought that Hermione may actually be guilty. Neither Harry nor anybody here seems to have noticed that confession(under truth serum!) is generally considered very strong evidence of guilt, certainly much more so than an appeal to demographics is evidence of innocence.

Reply
[-]Xachariah110

We know that she is innocent because we saw her being effected by a mind effecting attack. It's like watching an episode of Supernatural, seeing a ghost kill somebody on screen, then saying "well maybe it was a regular homicide!"

We as readers are privy to knowledge that people in universe are not. This is why they entertain the notion that she's guilty and we don't. Harry doesn't entertain the notion because she's his best friends and twelve year old girls do not attempt cold blooded murder of their own volition.

Reply
7Alsadius
I'm aware that it's a very unlikely case from the reader's perspective - it's possible that they just warped her mind until she did it of her own accord, but that's about it. However, we're openly considering even more ridiculous possibilities(confess to the Azkaban breakout? Wut?), so the fact that it hasn't come up is odd. My point is as much about the in-universe response as the reader's, though. Harry is acting in blatantly irrational fashion, and everybody else seems to be humouring him much more than usual as well. I find that strange.
2Anubhav
To be honest, I still think this is a better solution than most of the stuff that's been suggested on this thread so far.
1Sheaman3773
I got the impression that they weren't humoring him so much as even Snape thought that the very idea of Hermione deliberately trying to murder someone was preposterous.
1Eugine_Nier
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one bothered by this.
[-]wedrifid30

If you win, you made the right decision.

I will not argue about the definition of 'right decision', that is at least ambiguous. Yet when it comes to overconfidence in a given prediction that is a property of the comment itself and the information on which it was based upon. New information doesn't change it.

Reply
[-]DanArmak30

This would almost certainly be seen as Merlin himself expressing extreme displeasure from beyond the grave.

It might just as well be seen as Merlin expressing displeasure with the current carrier-on of the line when he protests a legal vote of the Wizengamot. Omens are usually interpreted opportunistically.

'Not some kind of sign?' said Cohen. 'There must have been some temple I didn't rob.'

'The trouble with signs and portents,' said Boy Willie, 'is you never know who they're for. This'n could be a nice one for Hong and his pals.'

'Then I'm nicking it,'

... (read more)
Reply
[-]wedrifid30

How much respect to the Dementors have for Harry at this point? Now that they know he can kill them and all. And how intelligent are they?

What it'd be really fun (ie. a desirable yet not likely outcome) is for Harry to make a deal with the Dementors. They will give Hermione VIP treatment in Azkhaban and minimize the damage to her in the interim until Harry can free her. In exchange Harry will give the Dementors the souls of all of Wizarding Britain's government and all the aurors. And, naturally, be granted their ongoing existence. He is clearly the greate... (read more)

Reply
4DanArmak
And this is another reason why Harry should not tell just anyone about the True Patronus - it would drastically dilute his authority over the Dementors and his ability to broker a unilateral deal superceding the one they've got with the Ministry. Playing on the fact that Harry doesn't believe in souls while most wizards and presumably the dementors do.
4wedrifid
Definitely. Don't tell enemies about your strengths unless you are positioning yourself to be intimidating. (Even then it is better to have the enemies believing you have strengths that you don't have while still being unaware of your actual strengths.) Well, failing that it comes down to the real fact that the dementors do assign value to doing a kissy-suck thing to humans that effectively destroys the human.
0Alex_Altair
Does death fear death?
9Vladimir_Nesov
If death dies, there will be no more death, and death doesn't want that to happen, so it doesn't take the pill.
8wedrifid
I don't know. Does death float around in cloaks sucking misty stuff out of victims, communicating and making decisions?
0RolfAndreassen
Yes. The Dementors in Azkaban flee from Harry's bluff, when he is constrained from casting the True Patronus.
[-]HappilyDeranged30

V qba'g guvax gung Uneel'f ntr vf eryrinag urer. Abobql qvfhchgrf Ibyqrzbeg'f qrngu jnf qhr gb uvf nggnpx ba Yvyl, Wnzrf, naq Uneel Cbggre; guhf, gur qrog jbhyq or gb gur Aboyr Ubhfr bs Cbggre, bs juvpu Uneel vf gur bayl yvivat zrzore. N qrog gb uvf Ubhfr jbhyq gurersber or n qrog gb uvz.

Reply
[-]mstevens30

Wild speculation:

Harry can confess to being the one who setup Hermione, or even having attacked Draco himself.

We know from Chapter 47 he can probably beat veritaserum "Not a perfect Occlumens, but Mr. Bester said I was putting up a complete block, and I could probably beat Veritaserum.", so he can testify in a way the Wizengamot will find convincing.

As member of a Noble House and Boy-Who-Lived he should be in for a much weaker punishment than Hermione, and can probably stay out of Azkaban. Lucius may not want to challenge Harry that directly at a... (read more)

Reply
[-]wedrifid200

As member of a Noble House and Boy-Who-Lived he should be in for a much weaker punishment than Hermione, and can probably stay out of Azkaban.

That sounds terribly noble. And silly. Harry is more important than Hermione. Risking himself puts everything he cares about at stake. If Harry doesn't make a SinguHarrity and take control chances are Voldemort or some other dark wizard will end up killing both him and Hermione.

Reply
[-]brilee130

Upvote for Singuharrity

Reply
0MatthewBaker
Double upvote for Zingers ^^
1Benquo
Alternately, he could tell Lucius the truth.
1MinibearRex
I think he did. What else does he know?
0Benquo
He hasn't told Lucius that he told both Dumbledore and Quirrel how much Lucius cares about Draco. It would be something real to admit to, just might get Lucius to consider the possibility of a plot, and transfer the heat from Hermione to Harry.
[-]NancyLebovitz30

I got sufficiently distracted by the relevance to real world politics (I agree with the narrator's point of view), that I became less concerned about what happened to the characters. I'm not sure if this counts as an artistic failure or not.

However, since I've read the comments at ffn as of last night and at least skimmed the comments here, I'm not sure whether I'm the only one who noticed real world politics, or whether it's generally a breach of manners to mention them.

Reply
3Lavode
The wizengamot isnt remotely like any extant political institution at all. The line of Merlin is reminicient of the 5 good emperors of imperial rome more than anything else, and the wizengamot itself is both largely hereditary and scarily unlimited by either law or custom. Politicians going into a frenzy of popular rage? That is a paralel. Other than that, not seeing it so much.
9NancyLebovitz
Combination of politicians going into self-amplifying rage and an irresponsible legal system that gives too much weight to self-amplifying rage.
0Percent_Carbon
You mean Amanda Knox?
1NancyLebovitz
Speaking only for the US, there are pervasive problems with police behavior, plea bargaining, and handling of evidence. I don't have time to go into detail, but I strongly recommend reading The Agitator for at least a few weeks. One of the background horrifying details is the extent to which the criminal justice system resists exonerating innocent people when DNA evidence turns up. An example. For what it's worth, I've asked about whether there are other countries which have better criminal justice policies, and not gotten any answers. Other governments do less damage, but this may be because of a less punitive attitude rather than better systems for accurately identifying criminals.
[-]Desrtopa30

They might let him stand up and explain his theory of how dementors work without interrupting him, I'm pretty certain they wouldn't let him walk over to the defendant and hand her a wand.

Reply
[-]Duncan30

If that is the case then the hat didn't actually say "it couldn't tell if Harry had any false memories." It said it couldn't detect deleted memories and seems to imply that 'sophisticated analysis' of all of his memories for 'inconsistencies' would be required to do so. The false memory given to Hermione is at the forefront of her mind and doesn't require the hat to scan her memories (though Hermione could replay memories of event for the hat presumably). In addition the false memory is entirely out of character with Hermione's personality whi... (read more)

Reply
1Desrtopa
It's already established that dementors can talk, but I tend to think of them like chatbots; they can exchange information in a limited domain, but get them out of the domain they usually operate, and while they'll still say things (like the dementor tellign Quirrell it would hunt him down,) it doesn't acually mean anything regarding its behavior, you're just projecting some sort of characteristic babble onto it.
3staticIP
True, but it doesn't have to actually communicate anything to its peers at azkaban. People just need to believe it did. It's obviously threatened in the middle of a court room, then starts flying to azkaban. Most people are going to presume that after something like that the dementors would leave Hermione alone. If they are consensus!dementors, not some-motive!dementors they'll still leave her alone, because people will believe they will leave her alone. if they're some-motive!dementors, they'll leave her alone because they don't want to die. Either way he wins.
[-]prasannak30

Can't see the significance of 'The Horn Effect' in the title....

Is it that the Daily Prophet, et al, are creating a Horn effect against Hermione?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_halo_and_horn_effect

Reply
4Percent_Carbon
Also Umbridge.
[-]Alsadius30

Sure, but coming out with a scary voice when he's trying to sound intimidating is a lot less odd than coming out sounding like a snake. If he didn't notice the latter, he's not likely to notice the former, in canon or in MoR.

Reply
[-]LucasSloan30

About Harry's darkside. It seems new and weird that his darkside can be hurt by Hermione's plight. Last time he went over to his darkside strongly (after dementor exposure), he ended up in a state where he hated everyone he cares about and only came out because he didn't know how to respond to her kissing him, not because he cared.

He did achieve some progress with his darkside in Azkaban - he became less affected by them, and now it seems it shares his goals to some degree.

Last time his darkside had control its response looked like this:

There was a com

... (read more)
Reply
[-]Nominull140

Get the dementor to eat "yes" voters until the "no" voters outnumber them.

Reply
7MarkusRamikin
I like the way you think. I bet Quirrel would, too. It's kinda similar to "There is indeed a certain useful spell which solves the problem".
1LucasSloan
Even if he can order the dementor around (seems likely), how in the world would he overcome the aurors already maintaining patronuses, not to mention Dumbledore?
6NihilCredo
Reveal to everyone the secret of Dementors so that their animal patroni are no longer effective. Wait until the Dementor has taken out most of the room (Harry has already managed to resist Dementors without his patronus), while either protecting Hermione himself or encouraging Dumbledore to grab her and phoenix-flee. Quirrell said that the best strategy against a Dementor is just to Apparate away, which suggests that, if the Wizengamot room has an anti-Apparition defence like Hogwarts, everyone who has neither a phoenix nor a Patronus (and isn't Harry) is screwed. I don't think this is going to be Harry's solution, but I think it might be the best of the violent solutions.
2NihilCredo
This is in fact exactly what happened:
[-]linkhyrule530

Taboo Tradeoff, remember?

Reply
7[anonymous]
I think at this point, it's fairly clear that the taboo tradeoff being referenced by the arc title is not one that Harry Potter will make, but the one that Lucius Malfoy refuses to make: revenge for the attempted murder of his son is sacred to him, and not to be traded off for mere political advantage.
0ameriver
I'm not sure that's at all clear. Harry is going to extremely desperate measures to save Hermione - that he is willing to sacrifice any possible piece on the board, possibly including his own better nature, for one single person (no matter how special) certainly strikes me as a taboo tradeoff.
0DSimon
It can be two things.
[-]Alsadius30

Erm...isn't the usual followup to an arrest to throw people in prison? I don't think you're thinking your comments through.

Reply
2Joshua Hobbes
I don't think they throw every wizard criminal into Azkaban. There must be prisons for harmless criminals like Mundungus Fletcher.
1gwern
Azkaban drains magic, he can be stupefied and tossed in, and without his wand he's going to have a hard time anyway. It's perfectly possible to just toss Harry in Azkaban and regard his threat as neutralized.
3Alsadius
Agreed, but the precise form of his comment was sort of silly.
[-]Desrtopa30

Hell, this wouldn't even work. They'd have him immediately arrested for destruction of Ministry Property, and never let him near Azkaban.

I doubt they'd have him arrested for destruction of Ministry property, because it would be such a PR disaster.

"Boy Who Lived Destroys Dementor, Arrested For Destruction Of Ministry Property."

It would definitely limit his ability to carry out any sort of breakouts in future though, and possibly incriminate him with respect to the Bellatrix breakout.

Reply
3wedrifid
Doesn't seem like anything a few lies and coercion of a non-free press couldn't handle. Or, say, stun him then let a different dementor eat him then show everyone how the delusional fool died trying.
6Desrtopa
I seriously doubt that if the Boy Who Lived killed a dementor in front of the Wizengamot, their response would be "let's let a dementor eat him to make an example of him." They may not respect him, but these are still people who've been celebrating Harry Potter Day for years. Just because the members of the Wizengamot are stuck in a hate-spiral with respect to Hermione doesn't mean that they're exceptionally evil people regarding other issues (this is as good a place as any to take note of the chapter title.)
[-]Joshua Hobbes30

"Beyond all panic and despair his mind began to search through every fact in its possession, recall everything it knew about Lucius Malfoy, about the Wizengamot, about the laws of magical Britain; his eyes looked at the rows of chairs, at every person and every thing within range of his vision, searching for any opportunity it could grasp -"

-and then the pieces fit together, and in retrospect it was obvious. The Boy Who Lived announced his discovery.

"I can deliver you Voldemort."

Harry knows enough to reasonably come to the correct conc... (read more)

Reply
[-]Alsadius150

It should also be pointed out, everyone thinks Voldemort is dead. Remember what happened in Order of the Phoenix to everyone who was spreading the bad news? That's more likely to be met by confusion than by bargaining.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific30

Roberta had been increasingly apprehensive about giving her daughter over to witchcraft - especially after she'd read the books, put the dates together, and realized that her magical mother had probably been killed at the height of Grindelwald's terror, not died giving birth to her as her father had always claimed.

I'm having a hard time imagining how Hermione got two copies of the magic gene if they weren't.

Reply
6anotherblackhat
Not that I'm suggesting any of these are true or even reasonable, but; * She could be adopted. * Her mother could be a squib, and her father was not Mr. Granger. * Her mother could be a squib, and she could be the result of Parthenogenesis. * Extreme luck could spontaneously cause a mutation in either gene to the magic gene, with the other parent being a squib. * They could both be wizards, unawares.
2pedanterrific
Apparently my imagination is defective.
2Eugine_Nier
Has it been confirmed that magic is a single-gene trait?
[-]Chriswaterguy30

Nothing original just now - I just want to go on record as saying that HP:MOR is amazing, brilliant work - I really enjoy it, as well as learning from it.

Reply
[-]75th30

I just commented below with my opinion on the Lily/Snape/Dumbledore-writing-in-a-potions-book situation. That comment is based on my firm belief that our existing knowledge of Lily's and Snape's relationship from canon is sufficient to tell us what really happened in the MoR backstory.

Eliezer has said that while HPMOR is not a strict single-point-of-departure fic, there is a "primary" point of departure somewhere in the past. It stands to reason that if he said that, then he knows exactly what that point is.

I want to know what that point is, too.... (read more)

Reply
9Joshua Hobbes
The "primary" point of departure is the general intelligence/rationality increase almost everyone received at birth. Almost everything else is explained by this increase in intelligence lottery winners.
5pedanterrific
Maybe all the idiots in the Gene Pool of Atlantis killed themselves off with Transfiguration sickness before they could reproduce.
5Joshua Hobbes
In that case, pretty much everything can be traced back to "Changes to the laws of magic so that, y'know, there are some." But actually, Eliezer does clearly state that there's "a single event that happened differently, at some point in the past."
5pedanterrific
Right. And I'm saying, it's not a single point of departure in the sense that a) Transfiguration needed rules to not be a get-out-of-thinking-free card, and b) Smart!Rational!Harry vs Smart!Rational!Voldemort would be painful to read if everyone else was exactly as smart and rational as in canon. Unless you can think of a single event which would result in everyone from Merlin on down to Draco Malfoy getting roughly an additional fifty IQ points...
2pedanterrific
The Horcruxes? The Pioneer launched in '73, Lily was born in '60, the potion almost certainly couldn't have been before that.
[-]pedanterrific30

In canon, the Elder Wand has a thestral tail-hair core; in MoR,

And Harry knew, now, that the concealment of the Cloak was more than the mere transparency of Disillusionment, that the Cloak kept you hidden and not just invisible, as unseeable as were Thestrals to the unknowing. And Harry also knew that it was Thestral blood which painted the symbol of the Deathly Hallows on the inside of the Cloak, binding into the Cloak that portion of Death's power, enabling the Cloak to confront the Dementors on their own level and block them. It had felt like guessing, and yet a certain guess, the knowledge coming to him in the instant of solving the riddle.

Reply
[-]WrongBot30

Maybe the thestral blood added permanence, because death is permanent? If it was replacing blueberries I doubt it was the key magical ingredient, and so its effect may not be directly related to its properties.

ETA: And also that's why this version of the potion so much more dangerous. It has Death in it.

Reply
2gwern
Yes, definitely. But it must be very dilute death or it'd just be a stupid potion. Dumbledore may feel guilty over such dangerous 'help' but he wouldn't make a suggestion guaranteed to fail. That's just crazy enough to work, but to continue the vein of thought, if thestral blood conferred permanence on all sorts of potions, you'd expect it either to be a deep wizarding secret Dumbledore wouldn't give any schoolgirl or to be used in lots of other contexts - anything you want a potion to be permanent. (Maybe witches aren't desperate enough to risk Petunia's potion... but how about Felix felicis? We saw what one day on FF could do, imagine an entire lifetime!)
5Xachariah
Invisibility cloaks in canon are supposed to be made from demiguise hairs or enchanted, and not usually made out of thestral components even though thestrals are invisible. The true Cloak of Invisibility may be using the thestral blood for permanence as well. Most cloaks of invisibility fade and weaken with time until they are useless; until Harry discovered a secret use, the primary difference of Harry's cloak was it's ability to last for so long. In canon, people are extremely prejudiced and superstitious against thestrals. They also share the same XXXX classification as trolls, according to Quirrel "the third most perfect killing machine in all of Nature." This means they're probably illegal to handle or acquire without ministry supervision. I would guess that most people don't have the means or desire to experiment with thestral blood. Lastly, Felix Felicis is a super finicky potion. It is toxic in large quantities, difficult to brew, and dangerous to get wrong. The inclusion of thestral blood made an ordinary (well, 5th year) beauty potion extremely dangerous; people may not want to risk making it even more dangerous. Although, all of these are just speculation so take with a grain of salt. But it would explain how thestral ingredients grant permanence, but aren't used commonly.
2gwern
IIRC, both canon & MoR flat out says that the Cloak is more than a merely unfading ordinary invisibility cloak, but grants hiddenness and protection on a deeper level than them. It differs in both quality and quantity, you might say. One might say the same thing of using or researching dragon blood. And yet... Everything is toxic in large quantities, and the difficulties & danger of preparation apply to, well, the preparation, not the end product. (This actually makes it an even better potion to make permanent with thestral blood.)
1Xachariah
Ah yes. I should have said the most easily noticeable aspect of the cloak. I meant in canon that's what tipped them off. You know, it feels significant that Dumbledore loves to experiment with and discover new uses for other species blood, but I'll be darned if I can figure it out.
1drethelin
Dumbledore is a secret vampire. The reason he couldn't defeat Grindlewald earlier was because he was flat out unable until he made a bargain with a dark power and gained the strength of Vampirism.
1pedanterrific
No, the blood sacrifices were made to slake Dumbledore's vile thirst. After they stopped, well...
4drethelin
Most people don't know how potions work. I think it'd be safe to tell someone to add thestral blood without telling them what for, and if they're someone as mundane as Lily Potter they would never figure it out.
2TobyBartels
Except that Lily did figure out what the substitution would do. She immediately figured out that it would make the subject sick and might be deadly, and she eventually figured out that it would make the change permanent (or whatever good thing it did) and would probably not be quite deadly.
[-]Alsadius30

Not necessarily - what would the Polyjuice make you look like? Also, hair in Polyjuice is used at time of use, not at time of brewing, and that may be the difference.

More likely, from what we know in MoR, would be something from a troll. "The troll is unique among magical creatures in continuously maintaining a form of Transfiguration on itself - it is always transforming into its own body"(Ch. 16). Also, rereading that passage, with it's "Expose them to sunlight" bit, does make the potion Harry brewed in 78 a lot more interesting. It's probably too obscure to ever come up again, except maybe as a throwaway line about brewing troll repellant for sale, but it's amusing anyways.

Reply
[-]wedrifid30

Horcruxing a spacecraft doesn't strike me as brilliantly creative; it seems like an obvious thing to do if you're familiar enough with muggle society to have heard about space exploration.

Creative enough to make himself unkillable. It'll do. There is no need to get too creative in these things. Find a powerful or exploitable magic. Exploit it. A lot. Don't mess around being clever.

Mind you in my books the fact that neither Harry nor Voldemort have 'won' already pretty much granted each of them an honorary idiot ball. Given their resources (magic!) and intellect they really should have.

Reply
[-]ArisKatsaris30

Please distinguish between observation and inference.

Reply
[-]75th30

Why are we supposed to believe so?

I think Eliezer gave us some good advice for understanding some of his characters' plots: “One way to fathom a strange plot is to look at what happened, assume it was the intended result, and ask who benefited."

Quirrell knows how Dementors affect him, and he knows that Harry's got a piece of Voldemort stuck inside him, so it was a reasonable guess that Harry might be similarly affected, and permanently, if he was exposed for long enough.

Quirrell certainly anticipated the possibility of failure — his experiment was ... (read more)

Reply
[-]MartinB30

Thank you for the clarification. I got to think a bit about the transportation modes used in HP, and found them inconsistent. They use a train to go to Howarts, have this nightbus system, while also having teleportation. It seemed a bit inconsistent, but I probably over thought it.

Reply
5pedanterrific
No, you're right. Partly this is due to the fact that the multiple methods were invented over a several-year period as the books were being written, but consider: Hogsmeade is within walking distance of Hogwarts. It is a wizarding village- people live there. We are given every indication that the Hogwarts Express is mandatory for all students. So kids who live in Hogsmeade have to travel all the way to London and spend most of a day on a train to get back to where they started from.
5MartinB
Seems to be just a ritual.
1drethelin
Do any kids live in Hogsmeade? I don't recall it ever being mentioned. Maybe Hogsmeade kids are too poor to afford to go to Howgarts.
7pedanterrific
What happens when one of the shopkeepers has a kid, they move away? Anyway, it's the only all-wizarding village on the island. You can wear robes and cast magic in the streets. Either the property values are through the roof, or... I don't know or. It's pretty much gotta be highly desirable real estate. The rich (Malfoys, Blacks) have manors out in the country or in a big city; the poor (Weasleys, Gaunts) have shacks held together by magic on the outskirts of small muggle towns. The middle class has to live somewhere.
2glumph
In canon, nobody is too poor to attend Hogwarts. When Riddle (Voldemort) is offered admission to Hogwarts, he tells Dumbledore that he has no money: There's no mention of tuition, so I'm guessing that's free.
[-]Luke_A_Somers30

First sentence... 'If the obvious answer is incorrect,...'

Reply
[-]gwern20

For those still keen on solutions involving violence, let me just point to this Eliezer comment: http://lesswrong.com/lw/aha/rationality_quotes_march_2012/642q

Reply
[-]wedrifid20

I'd have expected it not to. There seems to be power released with murders and I wouldn't expect that to come from wishful thinking.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific20

But is there something relevant, perhaps obvious, that I've missed related to this hypothesis?

Two things: one, why do you think Voldemort doesn't know where his Horcruxes or the Resurrection Stone are? Two, why would he be looking for them?

Reply
0gyros_in_a_half_shel
I should have been clearer: it is only beneficial for him to ask. Option 1: he knows where they all are, and in this case he finds out whether Dumbledore knows as well. Option 2: he doesn't know where they are, and has resorted to things like asking HPJEV how he would hide things, with the goal of narrowing down things he's forgotten. But I see your points. Thank you for helping me de-muddify my thoughts.
[-]BlackNoise20

I think my problem is with this "Judge Retrospectively" thing. Here's what I think:

Decisions are what's to be judged, not outcomes. And decisions should be judged relative to the information you had at the time of making them.

In the lottery example, assuming you didn't know what number would win, the decision to buy a ticket is Bad regardless of whether you won or not.

What I got from this:

you will have been retrospectively wrong not to have bought

Is that you think that if you had a (presumably random) number in mind, but did not buy a ticket,... (read more)

Reply
[-]SkyDK20

A thought struck me.

Could Harry not personally marry Hermione, thus make her a member of the House of Potter, hence make the blood debt owed one owed by his house? After that he could burden the punishment himself hence display the absurdity of the whole justice system, perhaps off a dementor or two in the process just for the kicks.

Please enlighten me.. If this solution is possible it certainly seems the easiest (all though I do like the "blame Voldemort-option" as well).

Reply
2Joshua Hobbes
I believe this was discussed before. And I think that even if he married her, she would still be the one accused of the crime. Draco wouldn't stand trial for Lucius' crimes, and thus the Boy-Who-Lived couldn't go to Azkaban for his wife's.
0SkyDK
Well Draco is not head of the house, so that doesn't really prove or disprove anything. Hermione's parents don't have legal status since they're muggles; leaving us with very little evidence to how this house business works seen in the context of the wider legal system.
0Alsadius
They're eleven, and she's been convicted of attempted murder. Those are not generally conditions amenable to a fast marriage.
0SkyDK
[Deleted: I completely forgot I'm not allowed to talk about later chapters in this discussion thread]
0SkyDK
Age does not seem to be a major issue (you could be betrothed as seen earlier since before you're born), so I hardly think that is a hindrance.. Also see "They're eleven, and she's been convicted of murder". Besides that I must admit to have no idea what constitutes a legal marriage in Magical Britain, but the debt does seem to be owed to the house though...
[-]BlackNoise20

you will have been retrospectively wrong not to have bought

Not really; Before you know the outcome, saying "my numbers will be 5, 11, 17, 33, 36, and 42" is privileging the hypothesis. (unless you had other information which allowed you to select that specific combination)

And even if those numbers, by pure chance, were correct, there is still a reason it was a bad decision (in the 'maximizing expected utility' sense) to buy a ticket. Which is what I meant when I said that you can't have expected to win.

Reply
[-]NihilCredo20

Yes, he stated very early on (at least a year ago, I think?) that he had only read up to book 3 or 4, tried to pick up the later books, couldn't get into them, and so relies on the wiki and other references to know how the plot develops.

I do not know if this has since changed.

Reply
1Paulovsk
This is actually weird. How can he write such a good fic if he didn't read all the books, relying only in definitions in the wiki? If so, he gain two more points of respect.
2Percent_Carbon
Also, he has read alot of Harry Potter fanfic.
[-]CronoDAS20

Random thought:

Bellatrix escaped. Therefore, Azkaban is no longer secure...

Reply
0DanArmak
I think the Wizengamot still trusts it enough to put Hermione in, though.
[-]glumph20

I assumed Voldemort's soul was split because the Killing Curse hit him. How that caused his soul to split is a bit mysterious, I'll admit.

Reply
5pedanterrific
I'm pretty sure the latest Word of Rowling on the matter is "mumble mumble his soul was unstable or something, stop asking questions" (paraphrased).
[-]CronoDAS20

Snape's been acting as Hermione's protector, not as her adversary. (And without telling Dumbledore about it!)

From Chapter 72:

Jaime Astorga, seventh-year of Slytherin, and until recently considered a promising upstart on the youth dueling circuit, stood ramrod straight in Professor Snape's office, with his teeth clenched tight and sweat trickling down his spine.

"I distinctly recall," said the Head of his House in a sardonic drawl, "that I warned you, and a number of others this very morning, that there were certain first-year girls who migh

... (read more)
Reply
[-]Manfred20

The person in custody is not necessarily Quirrell, or "unlikely to be released" can be circumvented a number of different ways. The only way the Quirrell is just sitting in custody is if that's what he wants, and I still think he's sort of a Byronic hero.

Reply
3DanArmak
Well, the simplest explanation is that he's sitting in custody because he doesn't want to be in Hogwarts while Dumbledore scans it for Tom Riddle's soul with the Map, etc. If he doesn't have a particular plot to carry out during the trial, it's easiest to stay in custody then too, until the Aurors choose to release him after the whole matter is considered closed. If he wanted, he could almost certainly leave, I agree. But why? If this whole thing is his plot, it's going on well enough without him, and on the other hand he possibly can't be officially present at the trial (unless invited by Dumbledore) to rescue it if something goes wrong. OTOH, if it's not his plot, it would still seem to align with his interests - he has more to gain by offering Harry to help rescue Hermione, once Harry has declared the government etc. his enemies, than he does by offering Harry to help sway the trial.
[-]BlackNoise20

I agree with the principle, but lottery is a really poor example of this, since it implies ignorance.

Reply
[-]gwern20

He's already given himself up to the dark side - see his internal narration!

Reply
0Sheaman3773
Which Dumbledore also doesn't know about, though he might be able to predict it.
[-]lavalamp20

Harry knew another patronus was seeking his own patronus, so I think he should at least know there's a risk that someone might be able to identify him.

Reply
[-]Vaniver20

I am aware. My point is that if you say "X is impossible" and then someone points out a way to do X, you now have a plot hole / have to admit that the fan is cleverer than the character or author. That's genre savvy evidence against the prediction that EY will say "X is impossible," whereas "he would end the chapter on a downer" isn't because he would get the desired effect more strongly if he ended the chapter on a cliffhanger, and then had the character fall off the cliff.

Reply
[-]LearnFromObservation20

I was thinking about Harry's four sides: Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin. He's already tried Ravenclaw (presenting logic and rationality, thinking through his options) and Slytherin (plotting against Lucius Malfoy in front of the Wizgov.-"you do not want me as your enemy") But his Hufflepuff (strong loyalty to Hermione as a friend) refuses to allow him to give up, and I think his Ravenclaw and Slytherin sides will shout down the Gryffindor option (destroy the dementor with his patronus). However, E.Y. said "figure it out fro... (read more)

Reply
3Vaniver
This is standard game theory. Read some Schelling.
4LearnFromObservation
My most sincere apologies, I'm a bit new to Less Wrong and my rationality is still not perfected. Are the rest of my theories still sound, or do they fall under the umbrella of disaster that is game theory as well?
0Vaniver
The underlying theory- that Houses correspond to aptitudes / personalities rather than goals- is mistaken. That's something Harry is mistaken about it too, so don't feel too bad about that. (That's one of the reasons he's so bad at modeling others.) Your other observations appear correct, and the outcomes you list are all plausible (though obviously not exhaustive). None of them strike me as particularly probable (except for the OR statement which encompasses most outcomes- the other option is that Dumbledore wants Harry's rage, just like Quirrel might, and so is deliberately not saving Hermione). Quirrel is a primary suspect behind this plot against Hermione, and gets more out of the Harry who has declared war on Wizarding Britain than the Harry who is grateful that Hermione was saved. McGonagall does not have the hero's disease that everything is her fault, and so is unlikely to see this event as under her control, and is thus unlikely to intervene. Similarly, Lucius is probably Snape's closest friend at this point, given Snape's new understanding of Dumbledore's motives and lowered connection to Harry. Snape might have a crush on Hermione, but I don't think we have evidence to that effect and he would have to be totally mad in love to go against the Wizengamot.
0LearnFromObservation
Well, if Harry fell for it, then I suppose I can't be too bad... :P. But isn't that what Harry "hears" when he thinks in the personalities of Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, and Slytherin? (with Gryffindor and Hufflepuff usually tag-teaming?) If not, what does it mean? I'm guessing that it is his imagination (not, for example, Voldemort's Horcrux talking to him), but why else would E.Y. insert it into this story? I agree that Quirrell benefits the most from Harry becoming so angry that he loses control in order to protect Hermione and is therefore probably behind the plot; but if Harry loses control, he loses rationality, and might do something like cast the Patronus Charm and reveal the True Patronus; something I have a hunch Professor Quirrell does not want. In addition, if he were to reveal how bright his Patronus was, could they tie him to the Azkaban escape? Again, something Professor Quirrell does not want. I agree that Lucius is Snape's closest friend currently (breaking with canon) but given the conversation Harry had had with Snape earlier, I think Snape loves Lily still, not Hermione. Interestingly, I think Snape might not necessarily be good or evil in HPMOR; I think he might be a sort of free agent. He might actually act in order to preserve Draco more than anyone else; he is very protective of Draco.
3Xachariah
Well, this is why Harry's models of others are bad. Because he assumes they just have the one Slytherin/Grffindor/Hufflepuff/Ravenclaw that they listen to. He underestimates people because of it. I mean, check out what Hermione says about him in chapter 31. As for E.Y. inserting those, it's great for narrative; it's a much more dynamic way of showing a character grappling with their inner doubt than them just sitting there and feeling conflicted (I swear I've seen that term in so many fanfics). I also think it's a holdover from Shinji and Warhammer 40k, another popular fanfiction I believe E.Y. is familiar with. Even though it's not as overtly rationalist as HPMoR, it's got many elements of a rationalist worldview.
0LearnFromObservation
But doesn't Harry accept that he has more than one "voice"? So if he's truly a rationalist, wouldn't he rationally gather evidence based on how people acted and his own voices, and after these observations, look at how complex people can be? Yes, Hermione doesn't think that he sees other people in that way, but he must, because he cares what Hermione and Draco think, and he goes to Prof. Quirrell for help and advice, doesn't he? I agree about the interesting narrative. It does make it more complex and quite a bit more real. (I don't know about you, but it's similar to how I think/have inner doubt.) Much better than "feeling conflicted".
[-]ArisKatsaris20

Still unusually speculative; we're told previously that an Imperius debt is not a life-debt

Not quite. We're told it's a debt, we don't know what sort of debt it is.

Reply
[-]DanArmak20

I'd think she was magically capable of protecting herself, back then during the war. If she took such a step as torturing an enemy-affiliated civilian to death, I doubt Dumbledore would lie and say he did it merely to give her political protection in a very improbable future where Voldemort was defeated but Lucius Malfoy retained great political power.

I liked the theory proposed here a long time ago: Bones went to Malfoy Manor to destroy Tom Riddle's diary-horcrux, which we know from canon was kept there then, it required Fiendfyre to destroy a Horcrux, Na... (read more)

Reply
4Desrtopa
Not only did Quirrelmort hint at much less obvious hiding places for his horcruxes, I highly doubt that Rational!Riddle, who was already writing the Evil Overlord List at that age, would have kept a diary.
7fezziwig
In canon, the diary was a trap: it was blank, but if you wrote in it, it would write back. Invest enough of yourself in it, and Voldemort could use it to steal your body. Also, it gave Arthur Weasley his best line in all seven books: ...which is relevant enough to MoR's themes that I've been waiting for a subversion to turn up, but no joy so far.
2Desrtopa
As Voldemorte's horcrux it did that, but I was under the impression that it was originally an actual diary that Riddle wrote in.
[-]Daniel_Starr20

Intended to suggest pulling some kind of social stunt that would put the Malfoys under obligation or massively shake up the politics of the room...

... but mostly 'cause it's funny. I mean, it's got to be a solution to some problem Harry faces. His fanclub demands it!

Reply
[-]wedrifid20

You could make a space-elevator out of ordinary string.

I guess that's one use to make of your soul!

Reply
3bogdanb
“Associated Contractors for Magic Enterprises: We put soul in our public works!”
0Armok_GoB
Nah, you'd do it with someone else's soul. There are plenty of random enemies with souls you can literally tear apart and use as building materials.
0wedrifid
I would seem to be left with a bunch of enemies that I can never fully kill. Perhaps use willing servants (who get the benefit of a horcrux). Use the POW/enemies as targets for the servants to split their souls on.
0bogdanb
There’s nothing explicit saying you can’t do that in either canon or MoR, but as far as we know one needs to intentionally split one’s soul (the only given way is killing someone), and also perform some (unspecified) terrible ritual. It also seems to require a wizard of some ability. Seems like a hard thing to compel.
[-]Nominull20

Well, the first thing that comes to mind is that it would be convenient if Lucius Malfoy had missed this session, but it's probably too late to break a few of Draco's ribs now.

Reply
[-]Rejoyce20

Out of curiosity, does anyone know or have any idea what time the trial's taking place? If it's before 3 PM Harry's unable to use his Time Turner to change the events of the trial. Unless he cheats the Time Turner like last time, or gets his Time Turner's restriction taken off, but he can't do that easily while the trial is going on.

Harry had used up all six hours from his Time-Turner, and there were still no clues, and he had to go to sleep now if he wanted to be functional at Hermione's trial the next day.

"Wanted to be functional" meaning i... (read more)

Reply
6Anubhav
From chapter 79,
2Percent_Carbon
Time Tuners can't change events. MacGonagal says that when she gives it to him and the story doesn't say otherwise, yet.
3wedrifid
Which doesn't (necessarily) mean you don't go back in time and change events anyway. You will never change events but events will be arranged such that this never happens. When you are the kind of person who would do that you may find yourself getting mysterious notes and fortunate coincidences from time to time. The details of whether or not the above is a wise strategy depends on the nature of the time-travel mechanism, decision theory. I don't necessarily endorse a time travel based solution to this particular problem. I haven't read it am waiting till the cliffhanger is revealed fully before I get into it. I'm not a fan of delays out of my control so I'm applying pre-emptive patience!
[-]beoShaffer20

I'm slightly confused, what would happen if Harry was given Veritaserum?

Reply
[-]pedanterrific120

Waaay back in Chapter 47, we get:

Look, Draco, I'll take one drop of Veritaserum if you can get it, I'm just warning you that I'm an Occlumens. Not a perfect Occlumens, but Mr. Bester said I was putting up a complete block, and I could probably beat Veritaserum."

Your question made me realize: Lucius quite probably is assuming Harry is a perfect Occlumens. Meaning it would be counterproductive to try to get the court Legilimancer to prove he could beat Veritaserum- he could beat her too. The trouble would be that no one else, possibly not even Dumbledore, would believe that Harry is a perfect Occlumens. Harry could offer to testify under Veritaserum and say whatever he wants, in which case Lucius is in a bit of a pickle.

Reply
6beoShaffer
That what I was thinking. Prediction for Harry claiming to be responsible.
[-]pedanterrific20

What do you mean he doesn't need to? That's the only way to use it before it unlocks at 9pm. Unless you think the trial is after that?

Reply
[-]loserthree20

Looks like you got a little over 6,000.

Reply
[-]sanyasi20

Harry should just threaten to destroy Azkaban, and say that Dumbledore can testify that he has the power to do it.

Reply
[-]gwern100

The easier solution there is to do something to Harry, not let off a filthy mud-blood murderer to satisfy a childish terrorist's demands...

Reply
2wedrifid
I rather suspect Dumbledore would testify that Harry doesn't have the power to do it. Not while he is in a room full of hostile aurors. He would need a seriously impressive (and magic workaround enhanced) dead-man's switch if he was going to pull this kind of terrorism off effectively.
[-]Lavode20

Petunia (but she was explicitly altered somehow by her sister) and Hermonies parents. Hermonies parents are.. pretty much exactly what I would expect them to be, in either canon or MoR. I dont recall ever seeing them in canon however, so no baseline.

Reply
2pedanterrific
Petunia and the Grangers are Squibs, though.
[-]MinibearRex20

There was a brief discussion in Chapter 65 about Harry getting his sleep cycle extended to 30 hours a day, but I don't remember hearing anything else about it afterwards. Has that happened yet?

Reply
[-]pedanterrific100

Chapter 79:

Harry Potter took a deep breath, slowly let it out, and then spoke again. "In mystery books it usually takes longer than one day to solve a crime, but twenty-six hours is - no, thirty hours is eighteen hundred minutes.

Reply
8ahartell
I also thought this was a reference to his extended sleep schedule. Chapter 72: Really though, since they can make potions to change sleep cycles, it seems silly that Harry would be given a time turner for his.
2MinibearRex
Yeah, that's at least slight evidence. And I guess part of it is that Harry wanted to have a sleep schedule that was 30 hours long anyway. He probably would not have gone for a solution that involved giving up his time turner.
2ahartell
Sorry, I think I was unclear. I meant that harry probably should have just gotten a sleep-cycle-changing potion rather than a time turner in the first place. When McGonagall first heard about his sleep cycle she said something like "we'll get it sorted one way or the other," which I take to mean that she (and Eliezer) knew about both the sleep-cycle-potion and the time turner as possible solutions.
0Sheaman3773
He might have been given the potions if he hadn't impressed McGonagall with his maturity. However, I think it's that the potion extends their sleep schedule, so that their body naturally adjusts for the extra time. If Harry was taking it without the time turners, then as I understand it, he would indeed sleep longer--and the sleeping schedule would still be rotating, making it worse than useless.
0ahartell
The potion he was given certainly does extend his sleep cycle, but if they can extend sleep cycles with potions, then it seems likely that they can shorten them with potions.
1Nornagest
That sounds reasonable. I'd take it as evidence that someone (probably Dumbledore) had a hand in opting for the Time-Turner approach: if we can infer that there are two plausible options and the more expensive and potentially disruptive one was chosen, there's most likely a reason for it. And we already know of one character who has an interest in enabling potential heroes by way of mysterious gifts. Doesn't explain why Dumbledore and co. decided to lock down the Time-Turner when it ended up being a little too disruptive, but there are a few options there. Perhaps they didn't want to set Harry against them by too obviously withdrawing favors, or perhaps Dumbledore intended the obstacle to be overcome (as per the third floor corridor).
[-]Joshua Hobbes20

I can't see chapter 80 being very short if that's when the trial takes place. Anyone else expect to be reading during Community commercials?

Reply
[-]DanArmak20

A reference.

Summer is icumen in, lewdly [loudly] sing cuckoo!

I honestly don't know why, but when you said June is coming that line jumped up and down in my brain and wouldn't stop until I wrote it down too. Sorry.

Reply
[-]wedrifid20

I used DD because that's where you speak up when you say it. Is there another character in this story that DD could mean?

I don't mind too much. It makes Dumbledore sound like "The Destroyer". Bodes well for the future when he puts on his black hat...

Reply
1Percent_Carbon
"It makes Dumbledore sound like "The Destroyer"." How does it do that? There's only one D in "The Destroyer". Is there a character somewhere called The Destroyer whose initials are DD?
6wedrifid
In other news, standard Navy designations for battleships are BB, frigates are FF, battle cruisers are CC and submarines are SS.
[-]malthrin20

So, what happened to Narcissa?

Reply
7Percent_Carbon
(Edited in response to feedback) * Dumbledore says he meant Harry to have wicked step parents - readers excuse this because Harry didn't have wicked step parents * Dumbledore sets fire to a living thing - even in story, he is excused of this with speculation about how he could have seemed to do that without being evil, and readers excuse him too * Dumbledore probably said that he burned Narcissa alive - readers excuse this as unlikely, pick other suspects * Dumbledore says it is necessary for bad things to happen instead of good - readers buy it * Dumbledore puts off taking down the man behind WWII in Europe - readers buy his excuse that it wasn't possible * Dumbledore gaslights Snape - readers excuse him saying that isn't what he meant to happen * Dumbledore tricks Hermione into doing dangerous things by humiliating her - readers excuse him because he knows what he's doing When do we stop making excuses and start noticing the pattern under them? Dumbledore isn't a good guy, he is a schemer who thinks of himself as a good guy. But he is willing to do very bad things for very bad reasons, which is not a good guy thing.
7ArisKatsaris
No, he didn't say that. He simply acted as if to imply that's the case -- at around the same time he was acting as if to imply that Fawkes was in reality a chicken. Do you think Dumbledore couldn't have ensured that Harry had wicked step parents, if he truly so wanted it? Draco said that McNair said that Lucus Malfoy said that Dumbledore said he did it. Citation needed that readers excused him for it.
7Xachariah
Dumbledore was also Lily's potion confidant. He helped her make the permanent potion of +4 charisma that she gave to Petunia.
2ArisKatsaris
I think I'll start downvoting people who make no distinction between their wild hypothesizing, and the facts we observe in the story.
[-]Xachariah420

We observe that Petunia says took a potion that made her sick for weeks then she became beautiful. (Chapter 1)

"Anyway," Petunia said, her voice small, "she gave in. She told me it was dangerous, and I said I didn't care any more, and I drank this potion and I was sick for weeks, but when I got better my skin cleared up and I finally filled out and... I was beautiful, people were nice to me," her voice broke, "and after that I couldn't hate my sister any more, especially when I learned what her magic brought her in the end -"

We observed that it Harry thinks her beauty is a sign of magic and deduced that it was extremely rare and dangerous. (Chapter 36)

"Harry?" called a thin, blonde woman whose perfectly smooth and unblemished skin made her look a good deal younger than thirty-three; and Harry realized with a start that it was magic, he hadn't known the signs before but he could see them now. And whatever sort of potion lasted that long, it must have been terribly dangerous, because most witches didn't do that to themselves, they weren't that desperate...

We observe that Dumbledore admits to writing into Lily's potion notes. Specifically... (read more)

Reply
6bogdanb
Upvoted for geek scholarship. Also, Thestral hair is used in the Elder Wand, and IIRC the Cloak of Invisibility is mentioned at least in MoR to be marked with Thestral blood. (The Stone is said to be marked, but I don’t remember if it’s mentioned with what.) The Hallows have all sorts of attributes related to permanency, or power over decay: being “invincible” means (more-or-less) your shields aren’t broken and your attacks aren’t stopped, the wand is able to repair broken wands, the cloak hides from death (it also looks like new from the descriptions), the stone brings back “souls”, and owning all of them makes you “Master of Death”. In the twisted logic of magic, I could see Thestral blood making the effect of a potion permanent (or at least for life) rather than time-limited like most potions seem to be. (Transfiguration needs to be maintained, Polyjuice needs to be taken periodically, and the D&D Eagle’s Splendor has defined duration.)
1ArisKatsaris
Thank you for explaining your reasoning. Upvoted. May I note that you hadn't explained it previously, and that not all of us are D&D gamers that we would automatically know what Eagle's Splendor was?
3Xachariah
I apologize. A took it as an insult and responded inappropriately. I know this theory has been explained in past discussion threads and assumed anyone who cares (wow that's a loaded phrase!) would have already known it. Even though it could be 5000+ posts of writing. In retrospect, that was clearly unreasonably of me. In the future, it would make sense for someone to post a catalog of all the non-obvious insights in HPMoR. I know there are others, but my mind simply labels everything everything I know regarding HPMoR as 'obvious' since I already know it. I'm reminded of the sequences on Inferential Distance.
2pedanterrific
Could you do me a favor and quote the exact line that made you think this? I got the impression that in this case "everybody" amounts to Harry and... maybe just Harry. And I'm not sure that Harry bought that excuse so much as didn't think it worth arguing over at the time. ETA: Oh, you meant the readers. Well yes, in that case you have a point. Actually McGonagall did pretty much the opposite of that.
4DanArmak
She registered her dissent by not showing up at the Hermione Humiliation Party. She didn't actually do anything about it - like talk with Hermione and provide emotional guidance and maybe pick up on her Malfoy obsession ahead of time.
7pedanterrific
"the opposite of that" as in, not excuse him. And yeah, that would have been helpful. My first reaction to the suggestion was interesting: I thought 'that's not really her job, though' which is true as far as it goes, but raises the question of whose job it is, which raises the further question of why in the world Flitwick is such a nonentity in this story with two Ravenclaw protagonists.
5Alsadius
I think the key line here is Dumbledore's "The Death Eaters learned, toward the end of the war, not to attack the Order's families."(Ch. 62). IMO, he openly burned Narcissa alive, as a method of scaring the Death Eaters into leaving the Order's families alone. It's a reason that many would consider valid, I think, but it would sunder Harry from either Dumbledore(more likely) or Draco(less likely) when Harry finds out.
5Daniel_Starr
That's a great possibility. The catch would be explaining why Dumbledore killed Narcissa instead of kidnapping her as a hostage. If you're in control enough of the situation to kill someone slowly and painfully, why aren't you in control enough to knock them out and carry them off? But aside from that hitch, that's a great motive for Dumbledore. Dumbledore does have this pattern of finding "poetic story logic" a convenient excuse for almost unlimited occasional evil. (Harry's intended parents, Snape as a kid, Snape's victims as an adult.) And in story terms it would be a great way to finally "open Harry's eyes" about Dumbledore, if the author wanted to send the story that way. I'd still say Bellatrix is two or three times as likely a candidate as Dumbledore. Both because Bellatrix fits the boundaries of Harry's oath to Draco so neatly, and because Dumbledore's other vile actions have been explicitly in pursuit of assembling "fairytale tradition" on the side of Hogwarts or Harry. Killing Draco's mother doesn't fit the pattern for making Hogwarts heroic or Draco a hero, unless... ... well, unless Dumbledore has some specific reason to want Draco to want to try to kill him. Of course, Draco is indeed tasked to kill Dumbledore in canon. But I don't think MoR!Dumbledore has read his own canon. That would be too much meta. I think.
8Alsadius
War makes people do some pretty awful things. I don't think anyone would be surprised by the Death Eaters massacring families en masse as a threat to their opponents - in fact, Quirrell explicitly confirms that they did, in his post-Battle of Zabini speech. If you're the commander of the forces of the light, and you know that someone is knocking your people out of the war with tactics that you have no plausible way to stop directly(too many innocents to secure, etc.), then you're faced with a problem that you must address for the war to continue, and one that you must address indirectly at that. Honestly, I can think of no better solution to that problem than...well, burning a completely innocent woman alive as a terror tactic. Maybe two or three, if the lesson didn't take. Voldemort won't care, but his people will, and it should at a minimum reduce the numbers of such attacks. It's not fairytale logic of the sort Dumbledore prefers, but we know that he can be a hardass at need, and this seems like a need. These are the tradeoffs you get when lives are the playing pieces of your game and you can't walk away from the board. War sucks.
3Alsadius
As for the hostage case, consider the logistics of holding a hostage. Voldemort is essentially all-powerful, and not even Dumbledore can best him in a straight-up fight(and of course, Voldemort's a lot more likely to come rolling in with a SWAT team at 4 AM than to let you have a fair fight, especially MoR!Voldemort). You need some sort of fortification that can resist a trained and very pissed-off witch being inside it indefinitely, and an unbeatable army at the gates. Hogwarts is as close as Dumbledore has available, and as we saw in Deathly Hallows, it's not sufficient. The alternative is a secret location, using magical anti-detection methods, but those have flaws of the sort the HP books spent a lot of time dealing with, and to my understanding of the spells involved, simply bringing Narcissa inside would ruin the secrecy were she ever to get out again. And of course, how do you pass messages telling Lucius that you have his wife and that you'll kill her if they keep killing your family members, and have them be believed and respected?
7Daniel_Starr
Or suppose Dumbledore did take Narcissa prisoner first, and that wasn't good enough to make the enemy stop. * Dumbledore kidnapped Narcissa and held her hostage. * attacks on the Order's family members continued. * Dumbledore, heaving great sighs of regret, burned her alive to make his point, sent Lucius the evidence... * Dumbledore informed Lucius that Draco would be taken captive next. * attacks on the Order's family members stopped. That's just cold-blooded, not gratuitously cruel, and Lucius might not be able to publicize his side of the story without admitting to more Death-Eater backstory than he wants discussed. So this could work. (In our world, even most guerrilla and terrorist groups have routinely held significant prisoners alive for intelligence or as hostages. Even the deliberately cruel groups have found it feasible to take captives when they wanted leverage or information. So if Dumbledore claimed that his war with Voldemort was so difficult that he just couldn't ever take prisoners, that he had to torture innocents for leverage rather than capture them, he'd have claimed more moral exemptions than claimed by Hezbollah or the IRA or the Taliban. That's unlikely already. Still less likely is that Fawkes and McGonagall are mostly happy in his company now after a "cruelty because convenient" pattern of behavior in the not-so-distant past. So I think Dumbledore has to have tried to use her as a hostage alive before killing her, for his internal behavior and his external reputation to fit what we observe.)
2Alsadius
That's a reasonable narrative. We'll have to wait to see exactly how it played out, of course, but I wouldn't find that version surprising at all. Conversely, however, remember how many of the basic protections we take for granted that don't exist in the wizarding world. In a lot of ways it's a medieval society, and very few leaders from that era would have flinched at doing something utterly brutal to make a point. Even real-world terrorist groups try to pretend to play by the rules of civilized society, because those rules are so expected that ignoring them would damage their cause terribly. It's the same as dictators running "free elections" - they're not, but they pretend for the PR value. I doubt that PR value exists in the wizarding world.
[-]ajuc130

I doubt PR counted for much among deatheaters, so Dumbledore did not lose anything here, and for the rest of wizarding Brittain - they didn't have a choice other than Dumbledore, so they wouldn't believe deatheaters that DD could do sth like that. And later they would not change their opinions, but would forgot their motivation (because it was unplesant - fear of worse evil).

Very similiar thing happened in real life in WW2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre Nazi Germany announced in 1943 that they have found mass graves of tousands Polish prisoners of war all killed by shot in the back of head by soviets. USA and UK had treaty with Stalin, and Germany was more immadietly dangerous, and Stalin was instrumental, so nobody believed Germans, and after the war Poland was sold to USSR, and only in 1990 Katyn massacre was made public.

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr130

Wow. I like the idea that Dumbledore burned Narcissa, told Lucius and the other Death Eaters and consciously relied on his good reputation to ensure no one else would believe he'd done it. That's creepy. You're right, that does take care of the "how does he have such a positive reputation, then?" objection.

I still think Fawkes would have a problem with it unless he'd tried everything else first. Fawkes is presented as quite the moral absolutist. But maybe Fawkes wasn't around - and possibly he did try lesser measures first.

Reply
2Eugine_Nier
If family members of order of the phoenix members are being killed on a daily basis, one doesn't quiet have the luxury of "trying everything else" first.
6Alsadius
Yes, but will Fawkes care? (I expect Dumbledore's learned how to keep a secret from his pet bird by now, so Fawkes may not know, but if he did then I suspect he'll be disgusted. Phoenixes don't seem to do situational morality well.)
1Eugine_Nier
As a recent example compare the attitude towards bombing civilians before WWII, with what every side wound up doing during that war.
1Daniel_Starr
Interestingly, PR value did exist in the medieval world. King John suffered some serious dissent among his barons for his severity (hostage executions, etc.). You're right that "be restrained with everybody" is a recent values innovation. There's a more limited version that goes way, way back in history: "be restrained with other elites, especially if they have relatives supplying you soldiers."
275th
One hypothesis is that it was actually Amelia Bones that torched her. When she believes Auror Bahry was killed seven months from retirement, she thinks "Someone would burn for this." Perhaps she thought the same thing when, say, Lucius killed someone close to her (is her husband alive?). I don't know if we're really supposed to read that much into it. But if we are, it stands to reason that Dumbledore might take the blame on Amelia's behalf, since he would be equipped to defend himself physically and politically from Lucius's onslaught, and since he didn't have a daughter whose life to fear for.
6pedanterrific
Susan is Amelia's niece, not daughter. She might not have ever married, canon doesn't say. (Bones is her maiden name, though.) ETA: No, I'm sorry, grand-niece:
375th
Right you are. I hesitated when I wrote that, I even remember noticing myself hesitating, but then I wrote it anyway. Kind of embarrassing that it was right there in the very chapters we're all talking about.
3Joshua Hobbes
I can't see how Dumbledore would defend Bones if she did that. I realize he's a little more behind "for the greater good" than in canon, but if it really was as Draco described there's no justification and Harry would take both Dumbledore and Amelia as his enemies. Now, for story purposes I'm going to assume Draco and Lucius both told the truth and Dumbledore did claim to have killed Narcissa. With that presumption, I propose that Dumbledore helped to fake Narcissa's death so she could join the light-side. Either that or Dumbledore was somehow blackmailed by another party. But Dumbledore said he doesn't give into blackmail, so I find that unlikely.
3glumph
I'm not sure if Eliezer has read the sixth book, but Dumbledore makes this very offer to Draco: Dumbledore proceeds to offer protection to all of Malfoy's family. Daniel_Starr mentions below that Narcissa might be unwilling to leave her son with Lucius if she's defecting. So there would have to be some pressing need to disappear in order for this theory to hold water; her life would have to be in danger, or something similar.
275th
When Harry makes his promise with Draco, one of the conditions is that if Narcissa got her hands dirty, it wouldn't make her murderer evil like it would if they were unprovoked. Well, if Lucius murdered Amelia's husband or other loved one, she might kill Lucius's loved one in enraged revenge, if she felt that she could not harm Lucius directly. That might be enough to put her on this side of Dumbledore's moral event horizon. But again, I don't really subscribe to this theory. It's just the only thing close to a legitimate hint that I've noticed or seen anyone else talk about.
[-]pedanterrific110

Close, but no cigar:

"That depends," Amelia said in a hard voice. "Are you here to help us catch criminals, or to protect them from the consequences of their actions?" Are you going to try to stop the killer of my brother from getting her well-deserved Kiss, old meddler? From what Amelia heard, Dumbledore had gotten smarter toward the end of the war, mostly due to Mad-Eye's nonstop nagging; but had relapsed into his foolish mercies the instant Voldemort's body was found.

Narcissa's sister murdered Amelia's brother.

Reply
475th
Whoa! How did I miss that!? That certainly gives this theory a lot more credence! It also makes it a little more plausible that Amelia thought she couldn't directly attack the one she wished to take revenge on. Maybe I subscribe to this theory after all. The "burn" line alone isn't that strong of evidence, but two hints in that kind of proximity to each other is too much of a coincidence to ignore.
2faul_sname
Why would anyone admit to giving in to blackmail?
[-]Furcas20

I want to quote part of a review on fanfiction.net by celopmuh that I completely agree with and that I think Eliezer should take into account:

"Let's not narrow down the hypothesis space prematurely." - Harry's way of talking is getting tiresome, I hope he learns to adjust it to his audience ("let's not rule out any possibilities too early"? I'm sure there is a non-lossy, good-sounding way to rephrase that). I understand this is intended, but his speech on "your brain just pattern-matches the hypothesis" turned out rather anticlimactic - it would sound much better if it was actually directed to Hogwarts students and not the readers.

Reply
[-]buybuydandavis190

No, that is the way that Harry thinks, the way that the ideas are constituted in his head. To expect someone largely oblivious to other people to automatically translate everything he says into language more suitable for them would be out of character, IMO.

In particular, when Harry really wants the right answer, when something important is on the line, I expect the analytical side to ramp up, and the social awareness side to ramp down.

Reply
7Paulovsk
I kinda like this way of talking. And, after all, he's talking to us.
[-]moridinamael140

Yeah. Harry talks this way. It's not an authorial accident. It's meant to be alienating and offputting to his peers, emphasizing the distance between Harry and a normal 11-year old.

I think when he's trying to communicate with someone Harry can speak on their level, but when he's upset he goes back to talking like a robot.

Reply
9Jello_Raptor
I think this is doubly emphasized by the bit where Draco struggles to rephrase his thoughts without using "Harry words", but given that the fic is meant as an evangelizing platform for rationality it makes me wonder whether there's a good way to lessen the turnoff of such speech. Ideally we'd have Hermione and Draco speaking the same ideas in a more colloquial fashion, but that would seem forced in all of the ways I can imagine it being done.
1thomblake
Yes. I had the same problem at that age. When not concentrating, I would forget to phrase things in ways children could understand.
[-]DanArmak20

How does Snape have the power to destroy the government, with or without Hermione?

Reply
[-]DanArmak20

I wasn't talking about the murder attempt story, and I don't believe Snape's behind it anyway (he's the most likely suspect after Quirrel, but he's not really very likely at all IMO). I meant Snape's scheme to stop bullying in Hogwarts - which is what Jello_Raptor posted about.

Reply
[-]Jello_Raptor20

He's more than capable of defending himself, and given that he's probably keyed into the wards at a level just below McGonnagal , it would be a huge security hole if he was easily imperiused.

Reply
2DanArmak
Flitwick would be beaten in a fight by Quirrelmort, who is both more powerful in raw magic and laughs scornfully at formal dueling rules. He could be taken by surprise as well, or fall into a magical trap, given that Quirrelmort has free access to premises. Being Imperiused by Quirrelmort isn't the same as being easily Imperiused at all.
2Jello_Raptor
Well, given that we're discussing alternatives to Quirrelmort, that doesn't quite apply. I'd be willing to wager that in MORverse Quirrelmort could imperius even Mc Gonnagal.
[-]Anubhav20

The official policy is "new thread after 500 comments". It looks like this is going to turn into a serious annoyance; two chapters pushed the last one to 500+ in 10 days, and there are another 5 chapters coming up soon.

Reply
5Jello_Raptor
This is why we need subreddits on this site.
[-]Luke_A_Somers10

I thought his soul was split by killing Lily, and that fragment was drawn into Harry.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific10

Harry's Muggle parents could not authorize it because they were Muggles, and Muggles had around the same legal standing as children or kittens: they were cute, so if you tortured them in public you could get arrested, but they weren't people. Some reluctant provision had been made for recognizing the parents of Muggleborns as human in a limited sense, but Harry's adoptive parents did not fall into that legal category.

I kinda doubt wizards in general care overmuch about Muggle law.

Reply
1drnickbone
But presumably they do care about rampaging Muggles on witch-hunts? That hasn't happened for about three hundred years. But then, by a mysterious coincidence, neither has torturing little children into insanity to appease the blood lust of the "nobility", something which is likely to get those pitchforks sharpened pretty damned fast. Secrecy about magic does seem to matter to these folks, otherwise why go to all the effort? Possibly because in an all-out war the wizards risk losing. They have less magic now, the Muggles have much nastier weapons, and not all wizards would fight on the same side. The magical world would be itself deeply divided if torturing a child proved to be the causus belli. Quirrell for one thinks they'd lose (Chapter 34):
[-]Pringlescan10

My idea that to the best of my knowledge is my own, is that Harry could use the time turner to go back in time, and get Quirrel/Snape/Dumbledore to false memory charm a student to provide crucial testimony clearing Hermoine and proving a plot. Another part that would help would be to present the wands as evidence (not original to me) but to also steal the wands of Draco and Hermoine out of custody using the cloak and tamper with them to remove any evidence if hat and cloak tampered with them.

I'll expand on this with a post attached to my main one since I've discovered that some people don't like long walls of texts, so if you come up with some reason why this wouldn't work check that post first please.

Reply
1Pringlescan
"The boy smiled, now with a touch of coldness again. "Okay, I'll figure out some way to set it up so that it looks like Lord Jugson betrayed his own side." " I think that the optimal thing for Harry to do would be to plant fake evidence showing that Lord Jugson was the one whom plotted against Draco. The motivation would be a combination of Lucius 'betraying' the death eaters and a desire to see his house rise in power over House Malfoy. All he would have to do would be to go back in time an hour, steal the wands of Draco, Hermoine and Jugson, and go back in time farther with that done. Then he just has to get Snape/Quirrel/Dumbledore to false memory charm a student into remembering seeing Lord Jugson leaving or entering the Trophy room at midnight. After that you just tamper with the wands, cast the right spells using Lord Jugson's wand, then sneak back into the Wizengamot and replace the wands a second after you first stole them.
5DanArmak
* Stealing a powerful wizard's wand, even if you yourself are invisible, isn't a small feat. * Harry has no way to reach Quirrel on his own. He doesn't even know where Draco or Snape are, and can't reach them either. He also can't bring in another student. * Dumbledore can't help him now (people would notice if he stepped out for a few seconds), so he'd have to rely on him going back in time later to help him - Harry can't manipulate the wands himself, let alone false memory charm someone. This has the usual problems of relying on something already being modified by future travel back in time, without actually observing it. * Harry can't know if Jugson has an alibi for that time.
0Pringlescan
Fair points, it would be very impressive if he could pull it all off, but I think Dark Harry could manage to do it with some luck. *For the wand I was thinking of something like pulling it out and then pushing someone into Lord Jugson and dropping it at his feet. He could properly time it so that 1st harry pulls it out and runs then 2cd harry immediately pushes either Jugson or someone into Jugson and drops the wand at his feet. Even if Jugson suspects something what can he prove? *If Quirrel had returned to the School already Harry would know, if he is still in interrogation it says specifically that Quirrel is in the magical law department, which is in the ministry which is in the Wizengamot. It wouldn't be hard for Harry to know/learn thats where Quirrel was. He would just have to find his way there. Snape is presumably back in Hogwarts as a teacher. He would just have to take the Floo network back to Hogwarts. He doesn't have to take another student he is just has to make sure they show up on time. *Dumbledore doesn't have to do it, Harry could get Snape or Quirrel to do it. Probably conspicuously absent Quirrel. *Jugson could easily have an alibi but its hard to prove he didn't just false memory charm the people for the alibi too.
0Celer
Hasn't Draco been with Lucius for the past hour? It would be one thing to steal the wand of a generic death eater, another entirely to steal a wand from under the nose of the head of the majority of the Wizengamot. Lucius seems to be well versed in the art of plotting and counter plotting, and getting Draco's wand from him and back to him without Lord Malfoy knowing with, at a maximum, five hours of planning, would be an extremely challenging feat even for Dark Harry. Still, I don't think that it is impossible.
0Pringlescan
I think Dracos been in St. Mungos actually.
0Pringlescan
To respond to Xachariah in my previous post summed up by "Enough people in the wizengamot would know about time travel that would be able to counter any time travel, or recognize it and have safeguards built in against tampering that way" This IS the universe where they don't use dying people to cast unbreakable oath spells, play Quidditch, and are sentencing a 12 year old girl to death in Azkhbahn after a 24 hour investigation (yes yes ten years but that would kill her all the time) If you look at all the possible worlds in regards to policies and safeguards regarding time turners worlds where Harry would be able to get away with this would have much higher probability density.
[-]wedrifid10

Yes, but she supposedly left Draco in the trophy room to die slowly. From her perspective, allegedly, it was murder.

No, it's attempted murder. It can be considered morally equivalent to murder and given the same punishment as murder but if nobody dies it is not murder. Because murder is when you kill someone.

Reply
[-]Normal_Anomaly10

you cannot unknow any of this stuff except by obliterating yourself.

This works too, but I think you meant obliviating :) Other than that, good point. Destroying the dementor present would be a good opening move for several different strategies--anything that requires him to be taken very seriously, really.

Reply
2Dufaer
If his explanation about the nature of the patronus was believed, the active patronuses should dispel. So if he demonstrated and convincingly explained his patronus and chose not to destroy the dementor he would be the sole person in the room with control over the creature. EDIT: The trouble is, that even if he manages to control the Wizengamot in this way, he can only control them for so long, as they remain in the room. So he probably would have to rely on their status and/or 'Most Ancient Tradition' keeping them from fleeing the room or calling in reinforcements, while he threatens to release the dementor and/or the information. (Note that he wouldn't have to reveal his dementor-destroying ability this way, just his 'perfect shield'.)
0Lavode
That would antagonize the wizengamot very, very badly. Not a good long term strategy, even if you intend to dissolve it. Destroying it, explaining, and letting them work through the logical implications on their own suffices. If most people lose the ability to halt dementors at all, and a few people gain the ability to destroy them outright, they are no longer usable tools of enforcement, and disposing of them all together becomes quite urgent.
1mjr
Indeed. The Dementor is storywise too conveniently present not to destroy as a way to grab the Wizengamot's attention - Harry having been established as being in the possession of Chekhov's Gun. Certainly not sufficient in itself, as you said. Give it 0.8 as a part of the solution. (As for potion-making, I doubt the information would be very inflammatory to this audience, but good point from OP about him being able to wonk their economy a bit.)
0DavidAgain
I've seen this 'convenient dementor' point a few times. But in canon, Dementors escort prisoners in other trials for serious offences, don't they? Pretty sure I remember them doing so.
0Normal_Anomaly
I don't recall there being one visible in the Pensieve-memory of Bellatrix's trial, at least not one that was present for the whole thing.
[-]glumph10

edited in response to the below

It's not only the intent behind attempted murder, but the successful execution of that intention:

“But how do you [create a Horcrux]?”

“By an act of evil — the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage: He would encase the torn portion —” (HBP Ch 23)

It's possible that Snape's soul did split. When Snape and Dumbledore are discussing the plot to have Dumbledore killed, there's this exchange:

“If you don’t mind dying

... (read more)
Reply
2gRR
That's exactly the point - whether an act is a "murder" or a "mercy" depends on the intent of the person performing the act. Murder splits the soul, mercy doesn't. And only Snape alone knows which one he would do.
0glumph
You're right. I was thinking in terms of the difference between murder and attempted murder, when the important difference here is between murderous killing and non-murderous killing. It still seems true that one's soul will only split in the case of successful murder.
[-]gwern10

He wouldn't be giving himself up for a piece like Hermione, but a piece like Harry.

Reply
[-]Desrtopa10

I don't think a dementor would be cooperative with him. If it's being controlled by people's expectations it's probably being controlled a lot more strongly by the expectations of the Ministry, and they don't expect it to care what he has to say.

Reply
[-]wedrifid10

I thought that it was split into heavy (CA) and light (CL) cruisers, at least back during WW2. Also deviating from the two-letter pattern

No, cruisers are split into battle cruisers (CC), armored (CA), large (CB), light and a couple of others, some of which are even still in use. Pre 1920 cruisers were just "C", destroyers "D" and battleships "B".

Reply
[-]staticIP10

Even if the hypothesis that they don't really think, just behave in a way that people think they will, is true; it's phrased in such a way as to cause doubt in the purple-robes (the use of "just say yes or no" to make them think there's more information then they're getting) and belief in albus. If it just answers "yes" to the first question, it's still plausible within the purple robes belief sets, but hopefully makes harry seem mysterious enough that they believe the next question can also be a yes. Then albus, who's a true believer, pushes the consensus reality over to a yes with his understanding that harry has the power to destroy them.

Reply
1Desrtopa
My suspicion is that if Harry tried to get all high and commanding on a dementor, he wouldn't get a yes or no, but something like "Wretched child, I will come to know you when your soul fills my gullet." I don't think he has any reason to believe that a dementor would have any inclination to be cooperative with him.
2Alsadius
Except that he already extorted them into backing down once.
1Desrtopa
You're right, I had forgotten about that. The fact that this dementor is in a hall full of Wizengamot members may make a difference though; its actions may be controlled more by their expectations than Harry's.
3Alsadius
Of course - if Harry's right that they cater to expectations, then he can't threaten it successfully. If they actually are intelligent, he can. (However, in that case, Harry is also a murderer. Whoops.)
0Sheaman3773
A murderer of death? I think he'd be pleased by the compliment.
0Alsadius
I'm not sure. He seems pretty appalled by the thought of killing even Voldemort, because causing death to an intelligent being is bad. I think he'd be very, very torn by the thought of killing an intelligent Dementor, even if they are a literal incarnation of Death, and would only do so if he thought it was necessary to end death.
[-]buybuydandavis10

Why rescue Bellatrix? So that there is an uncontestable witness that Harry Potter is Voldemort. Malfoy is afraid of Harry. Bella is likely out and about telling death eaters that Harry is Voldemort. Lucius found out. He wants to extract Draco and take away Harry's allies.

I theorized earlier that this was Malfoy's plot to gain leverage over Harry and Albus. Now I think it's Malfoy trying to fight Voldemort.

Reply
5Eponymuse
I find it very unlikely that Bella is in contact with anyone except the healer. Why would Quirrell want her running around and discussing the escape with people? It's also unlikely that she remembers any part of the escape from Azkaban at all, including Harry's role. Remember that she was Obliviated.
3buybuydandavis
Why? So that there is a convincing witness that Harry is Voldemort, as I said. I've stated elsewhere a number of reasons why he would want some people to believe that. That's not sufficient evidence that she was in fact obliviated. I can wave a stick and say obliviate too, and no one will be obliviated. Surely Quirrell could manage that as well.
0hairyfigment
Yes, but Harry isn't Voldemort. Which means she could have divided loyalties if Quirrellmort allows her to remember how Harry saved her.
0buybuydandavis
Divided between whom? If QM lets her remember, she'll remember that she was rescued by Voldemort, who is currently residing in Harry's body. I don't get what you're saying. "But Harry isn't Voldemort." Okay. But she'll think he is, so who else besides Harrymort would she have loyalty to?
0pedanterrific
There is no Harrymort. Her loyalties would be divided between Harry and Quirrellmort.
0Atelos
To spell it out more explicitly, the suggestion is that while currently she's loyal to Harry because she thinks he's Harrymort, in the event that Quirrelmort wants to deny Harry influence over her by revealing 'Actually I'm the one with the Dark Lord in his head, I was just manipulating the boy in a complicated plot, as is my style,' she still might maintain some loyalty to Harry because manipulated or not, he still broke her out of Azkaban and performed all those impressive feats for her in the process. Especially the fact that he faced down the dementors without a patronus made her think he might actually be coming to care for her even when she thought her rescuer was the dark lord, knowing that it was actually the boy he looked like who did all that for her is likely to inspire some loyalty. On the other hand, the dark ritual assisted brainwashing she went through was so thorough she was willing to Crucio herself, so the Dark lord might be willing to rely on that to prevent her from obeying Harry instead of stealing from her the memory of what she owes him. Either way I imagine that the obliviation Harry saw was likely to be fake, after all he would probably want her report on the events that occurred while he was unconscious in case Harry left any details out in his summary.
1buybuydandavis
Why? So that there is a convincing witness that Harry is Voldemort, as I said. I've stated elsewhere a number of reasons why he would want some people to believe that. That's not sufficient evidence that she was in fact obliviated. I can wave a stick and say obliviate too, and no one will be obliviated. Surely Quirrell could manage that as well.
[-]narfanator10

Chapter 80 -

Damnit, lost my nice long post. Here's a short summary:

If this a plot designed by Quirel, it's to help Harry. If this is a plot to help Harry, my guess is that it's via the governmental destabilization that will result - Unrest will be caused by the ruling, a lack of trust in the sanity of the government, and this just gets worse when Harry does something drastic to get her out, like taking the whole thing out. If it's a legit attack, not sure what to do or what will happen.

As for the events themselves, I think they happened. "Oblivation... (read more)

Reply
[-]Desrtopa10

He doesn't know about the horcruxes. He may suspect that Harry is Voldemort, but Harry doesn't know that, and thus has little reason to think that Lucius would believe him either. For the most part, the Death Eaters are as convinced as anyone that Voldemort is dead.

Reply
[-]Logos0110

There's no way Lucius will settle for a highly dubious IOU on Dumbledore's head after almost nailing Hermione and suffering a highly visible defeat, so this is not sufficient on its own.

Of course not. That's why 3B's additional verbiage was supplemental to 3A. So consider everything said in 3A and what's said in 3B, when assigning it a probability of success.

There's no need to bring it in.

Sure there is. To keep it quiet, thereby allowing Harry to "get away with it." There is no victory like total victory. There is no kill like overkill. And cold!Harry is a Sith: he deals in absolutes.

Reply
[-]Desrtopa10

Eh, everyone we have seen be smarter is a wizard

Well, Petunia was at least able to figure out that Vernon Dursley would be a terrible father.

Reply
[-]Joshua Hobbes10

Wait a minute! The Sorting Hat hasn't shown up yet! For those of you who aren't aware, Eliezer remarked that a spell translating to "here comes the judge" would be appropriate for summoning the sorting hat, although he did not end up using that spell.

Although we've already seen it summoned, it was not for any sort of judging reason. Therefore, I postulate that this first summoning was a red-herring to throw us off.

If all of this is true, then I'd say it's quite likely that Harry's last-minute-plan will somehow involve the hat. But how?

Reply
5ArisKatsaris
It showed up last chapter. You're overthinking this. For all you know Eliezer just meant that there was a trial coming up, or even that the song "Here Comes the Judge" mentions a hat in its lyrics.
4Vaniver
The forest: the Sorting Hat is a judge of character.
1Joshua Hobbes
I see what I've done wrong. In the original post, I assumed "here comes the judge" was hyperlinked to a google translate page. I didn't know there was a song. Here's the Lyrics, and they don't mention a hat. I still think there's something to this.
2ArisKatsaris
I had googled some different lyrics here where they included the phrase "Hey boy, take off that hat".
2Duncan
If the sorting hat has enough access / ability to one's mind to sort children into their appropriate house then it seems entirely possible that it has enough access / ability to identify a false memory. The sorting hat is an extremely powerful artifact which implies that the false memory would have to be a significantly greater power for us to conclude at this point that it can remain hidden from the sorting hat.
[-]JoshuaZ110

The Sorting Hat when it was on Harry said that it couldn't tell if Harry had any false memories and that it just looks at thoughts as they form. So it is unlikely it can do much to detect such issues.

Reply
1Duncan
The hat says specifically: "I can go ahead and tell you that there is definitely nothing like a ghost - mind, intelligence, memory, personality, or feelings - in your scar. Otherwise it would be participating in this conversation, being under my brim." It says memory specifically. Both a false memory and a 'scar memory' could at this point be treated as 'foreign' to Hermione. Are you referring to this slightly earlier quote: "Anyway, I have no idea whether or not you've been Obliviated. I'm looking at your thoughts as they form, not reading out your whole memory and analyzing it for inconsistencies in a fraction of second. I'm a hat, not a god."? Here the hat says it cannot detect deleted memories or do the sophisticated analysis required to discover tell tale 'inconsistencies'.
2Anubhav
This was discussed before. Doesn't look like Harry's masterplan involves the Sorting Hat.
[-]wedrifid10

Using what positivity? Harry's dark side isn't able to destroy Dementors.

Both canon and MoR seem reasonably flexible when it comes to letting people use situationally irrelevant positivity be harnessed for dementor production.

Reply
[-]LucasSloan10

Reference?

Reply
4pedanterrific
Whoops. It seems my memory was playing tricks on me; that's not actually stated in the story. The scene I was thinking of was:
[-]tadrinth10

If "A potion spends that which is invested in the creation of its ingredients." then what the heck goes into an Animagus potion? Something that's been transfigured a lot?

Edit: It doesn't seem like the method for becoming an Animagus is described in canon, so the potion aspect might be new to MoR.

Reply
[-]DanArmak10

That one action may have had a reason: to demonstrate to someone how loyal she was to him, perhaps, or what was possible with Dark rituals for mind control.

More generally, the public Voldemort persona - as exemplified by Harry pretending to be Voldemort to Bella - is very different from Quirrel's public persona. In my impression, Quirrel's is more personable and likeable, and just as powerful and scary and competent. This may be due to complexities of the Quirrel-Voldemort relationship.

Reply
[-]pedanterrific110

I don't know, it's kind of telling that Harry-as-Voldemort quotes Quirrell's "one must be efficient" thing to Bella without seeming to notice. And I've always been of the opinion that the glowing-red-eyes, high-pitched-giggling schtick was a conscious attempt to get people to underestimate him ever since the martial arts story. (He goes in disguise to learn, is taught to "lose" and kick butt, comes back afterwards in full regalia to kill everyone who spat on him except his one friend, in the process making sure no one else will learn what he did.) Apparently he sees a benefit in cultivating the crazy sadistic killer persona, but it's definitely done out of cold calculation.

Reply
1DanArmak
Why? Harry himself respects Quirrel (as a powerful wizard, all questions of motivation aside) more than enough to emulate and quote him. Story makes limited sense. Why leave a single survivor to tell the story when that survivor and all the dead are muggles? Why spread fear-of-Voldemort to other Muggles who wouldn't believe in it, him, or magic, anyway? Notice that the one we see actually spreading the story is Quirrel. It might just as easily that really he killed them all quickly and dispassionately once he learned everything, and invented the story to tell others once he became Quirrelmort and wanted stories to disparage Voldemort rather than to enhance fear of him.
4pedanterrific
When Harry asks his brain "what would Voldemort say", the response comes out almost word-for-word what Quirrell would say. This despite Harry's previous conscious disparagement of Voldemort. You know, right up until this latest chapter I would have dismissed this idea out of hand for how sloppy it would be- he states that one was left alive to spread the story which no one else has ever heard? It wouldn't exactly be difficult to check, either. But Quirrell was apparently a Ravenclaw, so I'm not sure what to think anymore.
[-]DanArmak10

Draco mentioned that Bella once Crucioed herself at Voldemort's orders.

Also, if Dumbledore could have set fire to Bella he would have, spouse or no spouse.

Reply
[-]Lavode10

Hmm.. Actually, thinking about it, I think that the most likely outcome is that Hermonie will be rescued by someone other than HP. Rereading the last chapter, Harry made absolutely no headway on the case himself, but he does succeed in something else: Persuading a great number of other people that this senario screams "setup" to high heaven - the very first thing he does : Explain Hermonines predicament to Hermonine. - this presumably sets her quite considerable intellect in motion on the case. Second thing he does: Alert the most formidable teac... (read more)

Reply
6loserthree
I believe you are incorrect. HJPEV didn't yell about the False Memory Charm until after the doors closed. Hermione has no reason to believe she did not attempt to kill Draco other than her own sense of her own character. And the text as written does not indicate that HJPEV had any success at convincing the other students. He just yelled at them a bit. Only a few heard him and the only response that was dismissal.
[-]wedrifid10

It would be less confusing (to me, possibly others), if you abbreviated Albus Percival Brian Wulfric Dumbledore's name as AD. (My personal preference for APBWD should not be catered to.)

I'd settle for "Albus" or "Dumbledore" too.

Reply
[-]Daniel_Starr10

Why does Dumbledore not want to use the word "Horcrux" in front of Harry?

Did Quirrell have a reason for not mentioning Horcruxes in front of Harry, other than not wanting Harry to deduce that the professor himself had made one?

Reply
[-]loserthree120

I suppose that if he learns the word he'll have something to look up.

Reply
7Daniel_Starr
Good point. After all, Dumbledore has already shown suspicion of Harry's attitude about death...
[-]pedanterrific10

On reflection, it doesn't even matter whether Obliviates and FMCs are normally removable in this universe - Harry would use a delay in carrying out sentence to either attempt to find a counterspell or find the real perpetrator or both.

This is a good point; agreed.

So no matter what, for Harry, a one-year delay in carrying out sentence has a really good cost/benefit tradeoff.

I would have said a one-week delay.

And if Dumbledore won't exert himself sufficiently to secure that

I see no reason to think that Dumbledore is even remotely capable of that. ... (read more)

Reply
3Daniel_Starr
I agree that Dumbledore doesn't seem able to get Lucius to delay the trial. But I suggest that Harry could suggest an agreement to delay the (irreversible part of the) punishment. Since the only fixed rule of the wizards' council is there are no fixed rules, such an agreement could be made. "She's guilty, and we'll house-elf her in a week." Since Lucius' priority is protecting Draco, genuine proof that someone else tried to killed Draco would be plenty of reason to release Hermione -- in exchange for Harry/Voldemort's help against the villain. From Harry's point of view, especially, why should Lucius exact a high price to postpone the house-elfing of Hermione by a week or a month, as long as he has the formal verdict and the young villain is under secure observation somewhere?
[-]Jonathan_Elmer10

We don't know that Snape wanted to eliminate bullies. Snape's intervention in SPEW battles caused a serious escalation in the conflict, but it was Quirrel's intervention in the final battle that continued the escalation to the point where something had to be done to stop it. We do not know what Snape's intention was for that final battle.

Reply
4pedanterrific
He might not have had an intention for that battle in the first place: The note from Millicent was sent by the bullies; Snape didn't send a note at all.
[-]Paulovsk10

I'll make a question, kinda off-topic. Does anyone know any good book about plotting? I'd like to study it more, I definitively got interested in.

Reply
2gyokuro
Plotting a story, a garden, or a plan? Only the garden one is truly off-topic.
3Paulovsk
I thought this topic was only to discuss specifically about HPMoR. I'm new in the neighboorhood. Yes, about plotting a story or a plan. Any recommendations?
5cultureulterior
I like Coup d'État, by Edward Luttwak
3summerstay
One book that takes a very mechanical approach to story plot is Dramatica Theory (free, online, see link below). If I were to try to write a program to write fiction, I'd start with this and see what I could automate. http://www.dramatica.com/theory/theory_book/dtb.html cultureulterior is talking about plots to overthrow governments.
[-]Joshua Hobbes10

The purpose of the list is to propose alternatives to Quirrell, who right now is the obvious candidate.

Reply
[-]Sheaman377300

Presumably that was one of the ideas that Harry checked with Hermione in the beginning of the fic.

Reply
0faul_sname
Yes, I'm sure they know. Do we know?
0Sheaman3773
Oh, I see. Not that I recall and not that a(n admittedly cursory) search of the book turned up.
[-]Vladimir_Nesov00

Or it's about how well the belief is justified, not "strength" of the belief, or number of the believers. Crazy beliefs or those based on false assumptions would have no impact in that case. And justified true beliefs can't disagree (at their level of specificity).

Reply
0Alsadius
Then how is it that Harry and Bellatrix had the experience with Dementors that they did? Harry's beliefs were well-justified, but he still had to KO Bellatrix before it worked. And of course justified beliefs can disagree. As a purely trivial matter, true beliefs cannot disagree, so you are technically correct there, but well-justified beliefs can differ if the participants have different evidence. Sharing evidence will remove the disagreement(assuming that all evidence is in a mathematical form that cannot be disagreed upon, of course), but that isn't always possible.
[-]thomblake00

I'm confused. "I'm pretty sure" is extremely vague. I would not expect to be able to confidently call something like that "overconfidence". Is there some formalization of such terms that I'm missing?

Reply
[-]Percent_Carbon00

Cool. I hope someone does it.

Reply
0glumph
Well, someone already did do it; now the question is whether we need part 13 before tomorrow night.
[-]DanArmak00

Well, every story that has people traveling or communicating faster than light basically has not-well-defined time travel in it. Which includes most scifi ever written, I'd guess.

Reply
3pragmatist
That's not really what I meant. There are well-defined frameworks of physical law that permit faster-than-light travel. Newtonian physics is an example. So even though FTL travel requires some suspension of disbelief, you're not usually at sea about what the rules are that govern the phenomenon. It's not like magic. The problem with the way time travel is often depicted is that it is like magic. There's no clear set of rules constraining which properties of the time slice can change when the traveler returns to it, and which must remain the same. Surely there must be some constraints. After all, if every single property is allowed to change, it wouldn't really count as traveling back to the same time slice. But where do these constraints come from and what are they?
1DanArmak
It's a difference, but not a qualitative one, I feel. After all, reality is entangled and there's no well-defined framework of physical law that allows FTL travel and also reduces to something like relativity as long as you don't turn on your magical engine. Everyone who doesn't have a magical FTL engine would still see your FTL travel as being time travel, and the same questions would have to be answered as you raise below: what changes are allowed, etc. OTOH, if you go by which suspension of disbelief is easiest and most natural, and if you let go of your belief in scientific physical laws. then the most natural thing to believe in is magic. It's what all humans believed in up to historically recent eras. The kind of magic that doesn't usually have builtin rules in the sense of laws of the universe or of magic itself. It just has limitations corresponding to the knowledge/power/wisdom of the magician. The more common constraining rules in such stories are actually moralistic (good winning, etc.)
1Vladimir_Nesov
This is a popular but incorrect idea. If you interpret special relativity via (neo-)Lorenz Ether Theory, you can have perfectly mundane kind of FTL without any problematic time travel, you'd just have a preferred reference frame. It'd be possible to send messages to the past according to some reference frames (in spacelike fashion), but not others, and you'd never get to communicate information in time loops. There is no serious problem with reconciling FTL and special relativity, FTL goes the way of ether for Occam's razor reasons, not because it doesn't make sense conceptually.
0pragmatist
There are perfectly consistent models of a relativistic universe with well-defined rules that allow tachyons (particles that travel faster than light). Frank Arntzenius has a great paper on this. These models don't allow "future-changing" time travel, though. Incidentally, does anyone know of a work of fantasy that has clearly articulating "law-like" constraints governing the use of magic? The awesome webcomic Unsounded seems to be attempting something like this, but the details are still fuzzy.
0Bugmaster
Most works of fantasy do this to some extent. For example, the One Power in Wheel of Time has very well-specified mechanics, though of course a lot of the complexity is left as an exercise for the reader. The metal-based magic in the Mistborn books is simpler, and likewise well-defined. You can also have works like Cardcaptor Sakura, which is basically an anime about a collectible card game; here, the cards operate according to some very specific rules, and each card has a narrow function, but the card list is very large and fairly arbitrary.
0DanArmak
Interesting. That paper is behind a paywall, unfortunately. But my knowledge of physics is very limited and I probably wouldn't understand the full paper anyway. (What tachyon interactions with non-tachyons does he allow?) I doubt, though, that any model of tachyons allows you to accelerate your normal-matter spaceship to FTL speeds the way most soft scifi takes for granted.
[-]pedanterrific00

(Edit: Whoops, this is wrong.) Chapter 30:

Then Harry's mind clicked on another implication, and he looked down at the steel ring on his left hand's pinky finger, and almost swore out loud when he saw that the tiny diamond was missing and there was a marshmallow lying on the ground near where he'd fallen.

He'd sustained that Transfiguration for seventeen days, and would now need to start over.

Could've been worse. He could've done this fourteen days later, after Professor McGonagall had approved him to Transfigure his father's rock. That was one very good l

... (read more)
Reply
[-]moridinamael110

And ever since, I've looked forward to the moment when Harry, lacking access to a wand, realizes that he has the means to launch a heavy object at a very high speed by simply ceasing the Transfiguration at the right moment while swinging his fist.

Reply
1kpreid
How about while flicking his finger?
6DanArmak
Chapter 43, before confronting the Dementor:
0pedanterrific
Aha! Well there you go, then.
[-]nohatmaker00

A few not particularly relevant concerns. Transfiguration is dangerous in MOR, But the type of danger McGonagall discusses is basically the same as any toxin. It's literally only dangerous if you eat it or breath it. A bubble head charm and enough self control not to eat anything that looks tasty and transfiguration reversion is no danger. So why is Mcgonagall so surprised that Dumbledoor used transfiguration in battle, and is still alive?

That being said, I think transfiguration is second only to time-travel in magics that are dangerous in the hands of cre... (read more)

Reply
3Nornagest
My guess would be that the danger comes from the battle as much as from the transfiguration. Transfiguration seems to take time and concentration, far moreso than the charms and curses that seem to be the mainstays of battle magic, so odds are it's not generally used in active combat for the same reason that you don't generally dig a foxhole in the middle of a firefight. In support of this, Dragon and Chaos Armies, and SPHEW, have all used Transfiguration onscreen during battles -- but not, to the best of my recollection, in battle. Combat stress might also tend to disrupt concentration in ways which are dangerous, but that's more speculative.
0nohatmaker
This is plausible - and the best explanation I've heard. McGonagall was thinking about this in the context of (and in comparison to) laboratory transfiguration dangers, where it's just your own transfiguration that's a danger. Also given the transfiguration speed of an adult wizard, I'm not sure that transfiguration ought to be that difficult in battle - though I agree it's more difficult than charms.
2pedanterrific
Counterpoint: sulfuric acid to bathwater. You've been soaking in the tub for half an hour when the transfiguration wears off.
0nohatmaker
Hmm, good point, there are other potential dangers. They are of the type that are pretty much only dangerous if you don't know about them. So if your enemy spikes your water supply, you would be in trouble, but that's not an unintended danger.
1pedanterrific
Okay, how about: you Transfigure a suit of armor to wear, and your enemy, all unknowing, casts a blasting hex or corrosion curse or something resulting in pieces of your own armor ending up inside you.
0nohatmaker
Good point: you should treat your own transfigurations like toxin - particularly if you are transfiguring from a toxic material or to a non solid. If the armor was imbedded in you and turned back to a non-toxic solid (wood, stone) that wouldn't be much worse than steel. I guess you might as well transfigure it out of ice if possible. In this example I think that not transfiguring the armor because you are afraid of transfiguration (a reasonable fear to instill in children, but not adults), and therefore taking a blasting curse to your unarmored chest is worse.
1pedanterrific
Partially it depends on the difference in size between the base materials and the target form. Things can be Transfigured smaller (Harry's father's rock to tiny diamond) or bigger (ice cube to rocket). The rock reverting could tear Harry's hand off, conceivably- shards of metal (or rust) getting significantly bigger or smaller once inside your body seems likely to be uncomfortable.
1nohatmaker
That would make for a pretty nasty situation. I had considered throwing a large rock that was transfigured to be smaller, then dropping the transfiguration in the air. This would be even nastier (though maybe not as effective): transfigure a large rock into a needle and throw it at them, then when it's inside them reverse the transfiguration.
1linkhyrule5
Huh. I wonder how that interacts with conservation of momentum. (Or if it does.)
1pedanterrific
I think if you can Transfigure an ice cube into a solid-fuel rocket conservation of momentum is the least of your concerns.
1linkhyrule5
Which is easier: "Become a solid-fuel rocket, which is shaped like this and this and has these parts...", or "Smaller, please."
0nohatmaker
Probably cheerfully ignore them, considering magic's general relationship with physics.
0Pringlescan
I wonder if there any charms to protect or clean up radiation damage . . . . .
1nohatmaker
I imagine healing charms would be at least somewhat effective. If shield charms don't work this would also be a great dueling technique.
1Pringlescan
Yeah but antimatter would probably kill the Aurors and the prisoners. Also Harry would probably realize that while subjecting people to dementors is evil, having a prison for people who commit crimes is not.
1nohatmaker
Yep, it's not a great solution when you have any vaguely adjacent friendlies. I was mainly referring to his dream of floating above azkaban and incinerating it to the bedrock. Also it seems pretty relevant considering all the talk about nuclear bombs. They aren't dangerous at all in comparison.
[-]alex_zag_al00

How about, Hermione goes to Azkaban, Harry breaks her out? Seems like it would have a better chance of working than the other possibilities, especially if Quirrel helps.

Reply
3buybuydandavis
I think that's the most obvious and straightforward outcome of all that Quirrell has set in motion with Harry, if his goal is a distraction that allows him time to steal the stone. If the goal is just to turn Harry against magical Britain and steer him to becoming the next Dark Lord, I'd say mission accomplished, and expect Quirrell would somehow save the day at the last minute, since the point has already been made, and having Harry actually attempt to rescue Hermione would undermine his efforts to take over the world.
3mjr
It's a possibility. They might've beefed up security in unknown ways since the last breakout though. Risky business. More importantly, I don't think Harry's Dark Side is big on patience. Or regular Harry, when it comes to allowing Hermione to be subjected to Dementors...
4Nornagest
It's not a great plan from the long view, either. Taking it as given that Harry can pull it off, he's now a clear suspect -- he produced enough drama at the trial to get everyone's attention even if Hermione wasn't known to most of Hogwarts and probably the wizarding tabloids as Harry's not-my-girlfriend. As if that wasn't enough, his name also came up during the last breakout. It'd be fairly obvious, as soon as the first person stops laughing at the prospect of a first-year student staging a jailbreak. After that, Harry doesn't have the resources or backing to stay in Britain (or to stage a coup). I'd consider it likely, but not certain, for there to be wizarding nations which object strongly enough to the judicial use of Dementors that amnesty might be an option, but I'd rule that out here on narrative grounds.
[-]staticIP00

Bellatrix truly believed she was doomed, that's a strong belief against harrys position. Harry himself didn't fully believe it either. I'd argue that the extent of bellatrixes disbelief was greater then the great halls, although it's hard to say. That coupled with the fact that harry wasn't a true believer leads to a consensus that they're not leaving. Now we have 2 true believer on harrys side and a bunch of people who probably don't have real strong opinions one way or the other.

Also, it's entirely possible that magical ability decides how many "vot... (read more)

Reply
0Sheaman3773
Why does Albus have such a belief? He witnessed Harry kill a dementor, yes, but not control one. That's not to say that he would disbelieve that Harry could do it, but I see no reason for him to have a reason to "very very strongly believe" it.
2staticIP
Because harry can carry through on his threats, and it seems the standard mental model for dementors has them being self-serving. A dementor should respond to threats, as far as I can tell. When I was arguing this I was also taking into account that albus (and the great hall) had seen the dementor be afraid of harry, but it occurs to me that that was in the future.
[-]TobyBartels00

Use ‘that that’.

Reply
[-]Carinthium00

Okay, as far as I can tell that works...

Reply
[-]DanArmak00

He certainly might do it if the Dementor started acting oddly. Edit: oops, wrong scenario.

Reply
2pedanterrific
What are you talking about? The scenario under discussion is that Harry casts his Patronus out of the blue, destroying the Dementor.
0DanArmak
Oops, right. I got confused from all the suggestions of Harry controlling the dementor in different threads. Still Dumbledore might get suspicious and bring out his patronus to identify Harry's, but it's an acceptably small risk to take, I guess.
Moderation Log
1000Comments