Is poison really a good attack against someone who holds the Philosopher's Stone?

Is there any legitimate reason why a gun wouldn't work? I mean, I now strongly suspect it wasn't loaded, but in theory it should do.

I admit the uncertainty as to how the horcrux system works could mean that killing Tom R. Jr is a bad idea.

Hm. I did not properly account for that. Specifying "girl-child friend's counsel and restraint" and "that she is a part of this world for you to care about" is definitive in that Voldemort intends to restore Hermione as Hermione. For my theory to work, this would have to be a long-term gambit that Harry has made immediate; but this would not explain why Voldemort has made so many tactical, i.e. short-term, errors. So I agree this is strong evidence against my prediction. New confidence: 1%.

EDIT: If someone can explain how to add strikethrough to my original confidence, that would be helpful.

Voldemort believes that Harry “WILL TEAR APART THE VERY STARS IN HEAVEN” without Hermione. What wouldn't you do to protect the person preventing that, given that you are willing to murder unknown hundreds for Horcruxes.

On a side note - Blood Fort sacrifice, hm? *amused*

"Fal-Tor-Pan" similarly, though I had to Google that one.

What's interesting is the irony- he seems to think that Hermione can stop Harry making world domination choices. Harry. This is Voldemort here, and he genuinely believes that his nemesis, who is very much against death (even more so than him) is a greater threat to the world.

And his solution: make sure he has friends. I neither see how Voldermort sees Harry as a more credible threat than himself, nor why he thinks Hermione is a better option than simply killing Harry.

Confidence: 25%.

Hm... this isn't a dig at you or anything, just a thought I'm having trouble answering for myself right now, but how low does one get to set the probability of a prediction, and still call it a prediction? At which point - seems it's not 50% - should you rather say "I'm predicting this won't happen?"

It's interesting that Voldemort is so attached to the idea of this restraining power Hermione has over Harry. Does Voldemort believe that this restraint weakens Harry significantly, by restricting him from making morally ambiguous choices? There's strong evidence that Harry shies away from evil solutions (Horcruxes are not a valid immortality method while they require human sacrifice), but he is certainly capable of morally neutral solutions. Hermione's emphasis on doing the Right Thing in all cases might strike Voldemort as a weakness he can then go on to exploit in his counterpart.

In case you are unaware, hyakuju montauk is a reference to this horrifying SCP. Hyakuju is Japanese for 110.

Blood Fort is probably Blood Fort Andromeda, the Nobel Phantasm of Rider in fate stay/night, where it was also used to threaten a school full of students.

Apokatastethi is apparently a biblical Greek hapax legomenon that means resurrection, as in the resurrection that is promised by Christianity during the end times. I think the phrase means, "restore, restore, restore the body for me" but my biblical Greek is even worse than my biblical Hebrew, and both are decades old.

A reasonably non-dark way of making people nigh-immortal, though he might have to leave out the troll part if they turn out to be sapient.