= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 9 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (718)
Evidence for: the most powerful wizards we know of never have Animagus forms (Grindelwald, Dumbledore, Voldemort, the Founders of Hogwarts, Merlin) that are mentioned.
Evidence against: Harry's parents & co. regarded Animagus as something so desirable that they were willing to break a strong government law and work hard to figure out how to turn themselves into Animagi. No such penalty seems to ever be mentioned.
Voldemort is an unregistered animagus in MoR canon.
You mean Quirrel? Quirrel no longer seeks power directly through battle magic, and the more I think on him actually the more he seems like a wildcard blowing up all sorts of theories.
Tom Riddle, who became Voldemort, is the one who added to his list of rules
It could easily be a very small drain. Harry goes around with that transfigured rock on his finger which is implied to be a not-insignificant constant drain on his magic, yet does not seem to be a noticable detriment to his spellcasting.
Another Test: A persons magic is often likened to a muscle; it gets stronger with use. If the "muscle" could be measured directly would its average strength be higher among Animagi? (Actually testing that would be impossible; there simply aren't enough animagi in the world to get meaningful statistics, but if there were...)
Edit for "Duh" moment. If destroying someone's animagus form is non-invasive, does the former animagus suddenly have slightly more magical power than before their form's destruction?