• 51 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for emmafrostxmen
#1 Posted by EmmaFrostXmen (936 posts) - - Show Bio

Voldemort gets his original wand

High Tier Team- Bellatrix Lestrange, Severus Snape, Minerva McGonagall, Fillius Flitwick, Alastor Mad Eye Moody, Kingsley Shacklebolt, Antonin Dolohov, And Sirius Black

Morals On

Fight Takes Place In the Hogwarts Courtyard

Note: You can split the team however you want against Voldemort or Dumbledore

Avatar image for richard96
#2 Edited by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

Tom and Albus get overwhelmed. They can’t deal with so many skilled foes.

Avatar image for aka_aka_aka_ak
#3 Posted by Aka_aka_aka_ak (2875 posts) - - Show Bio

Dumbledore/Voldemort. I think both of these at full power are so far beyond everyone else (except Grindelwald) that no number of lesser skilled wizards are ever enough.

Avatar image for geekryan
#4 Posted by geekryan (3820 posts) - - Show Bio

Tom and Albus get overwhelmed. They can’t deal with so many skilled foes.

Agreed.

It's 8v2, so both Dumbledore and Voldemort have to face off 4 opponents at once. Both Dumbledore and Voldemort are insanely powerful and skilled, but against 4 high-tiers, they might get overwhelmed.

Avatar image for turr
#5 Posted by Turr (1120 posts) - - Show Bio

Dumbledore solos. Id really love an explanation to why people think he cant take this.

There was a reason why Voldemort felt confident coming to Ministrt of Magic through the front door, though he could just as well found a legion of aurors there. There was a reason why Voldemort wasnt afraid to sit around 20 deatheaters after he was believed dead for almost 20 years. There was a reason why Grindelwad wasnt afraid to reveal his identity in front of several dozen aurors.

To top wizards numbers are meaningless. They can fight you 1 vs 10 and more and dont break a sweat. Voldemort broke apart a barrier created by an entire Hogwarts staff easily. Grindelwald protected himself from a machine gun amount of spells when he fought aurors. Dumbledore made the ministry aurors team and Umbridge look like a joke in 2 seconds. Grindelwald faced entire French ministry alone after disbanding his hearing and they couldnt touch him.

To challenge the best wizards in HP lore you need a wizard who can compete with him. Numbers were NEVER the issue. Examples for that are countless, and more often then not, these were high quality numbers too.

Dumbledore can solo 8 people. He is teleporting too quickly to be tagged. His every spell is so powerful it results in a one shot. He cleans house in 8 spells. Voldemort can probably do similarly well too.

duo is mismatch.

Avatar image for diarrhearegatta
#6 Posted by DiarrheaRegatta (4123 posts) - - Show Bio

Black solos.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#7 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@richard96: @geekryan: Voldemort casually overpowered a trio of these guys the second sacrificial protection lost it's relevance and Grindelwald fought 20 Aurors to a stalemate, the numbers are irrelevant.

OT-Duo crush.

Avatar image for drpepperman
#8 Posted by DrPepperMan (6288 posts) - - Show Bio

Tom and Albus. Dumbledore would KO almost all of them with one attack and Voldemort can easily cast an Unforgivable Curse that no one here could counter.

Avatar image for arkhamasylum3
#9 Posted by ArkhamAsylum3 (2856 posts) - - Show Bio

Duo crushes.

Avatar image for mygod101
#10 Posted by MYGOD101 (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@turr said:

Dumbledore solos. Id really love an explanation to why people think he cant take this.

There was a reason why Voldemort felt confident coming to Ministrt of Magic through the front door, though he could just as well found a legion of aurors there. There was a reason why Voldemort wasnt afraid to sit around 20 deatheaters after he was believed dead for almost 20 years. There was a reason why Grindelwad wasnt afraid to reveal his identity in front of several dozen aurors.

To top wizards numbers are meaningless. They can fight you 1 vs 10 and more and dont break a sweat. Voldemort broke apart a barrier created by an entire Hogwarts staff easily. Grindelwald protected himself from a machine gun amount of spells when he fought aurors. Dumbledore made the ministry aurors team and Umbridge look like a joke in 2 seconds. Grindelwald faced entire French ministry alone after disbanding his hearing and they couldnt touch him.

To challenge the best wizards in HP lore you need a wizard who can compete with him. Numbers were NEVER the issue. Examples for that are countless, and more often then not, these were high quality numbers too.

Dumbledore can solo 8 people. He is teleporting too quickly to be tagged. His every spell is so powerful it results in a one shot. He cleans house in 8 spells. Voldemort can probably do similarly well too.

duo is mismatch.

I agree with most of your post. But in actuality Voldemort was actually better than Dumbledore in magic. While Dumbledore was better than Voldemort in understanding of magic.

OT: Voldemort solos, Dumbledore solos.

Literally we saw Voldemort casually one shot Snape who knew he was going to get killed and he didn't even bother fighting Voldemort. everyone on this list is one shot for Voldemort.

Avatar image for emmafrostxmen
#11 Posted by EmmaFrostXmen (936 posts) - - Show Bio

@mygod101: Bella Has blocked One Of dumbledores spells before. so not to say your wrong, but she won’t be 1 shot

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#12 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@emmafrostxmen: Honestly, I wouldn't expect anything from him, he's given some of the most illogical and poorest performances in debates and ignores evidence brick wall style.

Avatar image for emmafrostxmen
#13 Posted by EmmaFrostXmen (936 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for mygod101
#14 Posted by MYGOD101 (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@mygod101: Bella Has blocked One Of dumbledores spells before. so not to say your wrong, but she won’t be 1 shot

I am aware of that. But I don't Dumbledore was actually trying to kill that person. 3 of the people on this list was one shotted by Voldemort while using a malfunctioning wand. I understand where you are coming from. I really don't think this is close fight at all, throw in Grindelwald with these tiers then they might have a chance of getting their attention.

Avatar image for emmafrostxmen
#15 Posted by EmmaFrostXmen (936 posts) - - Show Bio

@mygod101: No, if I add Grindelwald he will hold off dumbledore until the 8 high tiers beat Voldemort.

Also this is Morals “On”, so Albus won’t go for the kill anyway.

All I was saying was that bella Wong be 1 shot

Avatar image for mygod101
#16 Edited by MYGOD101 (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@emmafrostxmen: okay....But Voldemort has already one shotted 4 of the wizards on that list though.

the Grindelwald stuff was kind of a joke...but I don't think you realize how powerful the Elder wand is. Grindelwald went from getting defeated by 4 wizards to nearly being able to destroy a city.

since you said morals are on for Dumbledore then ight.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#17 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

Flat out lying. Jesus.

Avatar image for arkhamasylum3
#18 Posted by ArkhamAsylum3 (2856 posts) - - Show Bio

@mygod101 said:

@emmafrostxmen: okay....But Voldemort has already one shotted 4 of the wizards on that list though.

the Grindelwald stuff was kind of a joke...but I don't think you realize how powerful the Elder wand is. Grindelwald went from getting defeated by 4 wizards to nearly being able to destroy a city.

since you said morals are on for Dumbledore then ight.

Grindelwald has never been defeated by 4 wizards lmao.

Avatar image for mygod101
#19 Posted by MYGOD101 (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@mygod101 said:

@emmafrostxmen: okay....But Voldemort has already one shotted 4 of the wizards on that list though.

the Grindelwald stuff was kind of a joke...but I don't think you realize how powerful the Elder wand is. Grindelwald went from getting defeated by 4 wizards to nearly being able to destroy a city.

since you said morals are on for Dumbledore then ight.

Grindelwald has never been defeated by 4 wizards lmao.

That is not what I meant, what I was saying was that Grindelwald went from only defeating 4 wizards before losing to being able to nearly destroy a city.

Either way...even if you wank and say it was 14 wizards still doesn't change anything. without the elder wand Grindelwald is raped by Voldemort or Dumbledore. with the Elder wand, Grindelwald get stomp by either Voldemort or Dumbledore.

Avatar image for richard96
#22 Edited by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77:

“Voldemort casually overpowered a trio of these guys the second sacrificial protection lost it's relevance and Grindelwald fought 20 Aurors to a stalemate, the numbers are irrelevant.”

In fact Voldemort was fighting on equal terms with them. The Aurors GG was defeating were fodder. Here we have the 8 most powerful wizards of the verse after the big three. Snape and Bella can hold off Voldemort while the other 6 surround and curbstomp Dumbledore, and then Tom gets bodied.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#23 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@richard96: In fact Voldemort was fighting on equal terms with them.

Because they were amped, the second Voldemort got angry he casually ragdolled them.

The Aurors GG was defeating were fodder.

Average Aurors have given fights to high tier wizards, calling them fodder is highly disingenuous, they are by all accounts the elite. Based off this feat either could solo comfortably.

Here we have the 8 most powerful wizards of the verse after the big three.

Which is irrelevant given the huge gap between anyone here and the big three who are cannon fodder by comparison.

Snape and Bella can hold off Voldemort

Voldemort casually ragdolled a trio superior to this duo, they aren't holding off shit.

while the other 6 surround and curbstomp Dumbledore, and then Tom gets bodied.

The other 6 get ragdolled by Dumbledore lol.

Avatar image for richard96
#24 Posted by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77:

“Because they were amped, the second Voldemort got angry he casually ragdolled them.”

He only threw them back, IIRC.

“Average Aurors have given fights to high tier wizards, calling them fodder is highly disingenuous, they are by all accounts the elite. Based off this feat either could solo comfortably.”

Average aurors are fodder to high tiers. Snape one-shotted Harry who is already stronger than many average aurors, and Snape is weaker than Gellert.

“Which is irrelevant given the huge gap between anyone here and the big three who are cannon fodder by comparison.”

A gap that isn’t enough when they are 2 vs 8.

“Voldemort casually ragdolled a trio superior to this duo, they aren't holding off shit.”

Newt, who is much weaker than Snape + Bella, held off Gellert.

“The other 6 get ragdolled by Dumbledore lol.”

Feats for Dumbledore defeating 6, not 1 or 2, high tiers?

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#25 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@richard96: He only threw them back, IIRC.

You clearly did not put a lot of thought into this argument, they all went flying off their feats, as in defeated and if not for Harry's intervention would not have survived.

Average aurors are fodder to high tiers. Snape one-shotted Harry who is already stronger than many average aurors, and Snape is weaker than Gellert.

False, Tonks performed significantly better against Bellatrix than Harry, contending with her for a period of time and she's a low tier Auror, a new recruit amongst they're weakest ranks. Aurors can compare to high tiers, face it.

A gap that isn’t enough when they are 2 vs 8.

Which didn't phase Voldemort against the trio, or Grindelwald against 20 Aurors, or his strike team feat in FB 2. Numbers don't matter when they're all one shot fodder, it'll take considerably more to overwhelm them.

Newt, who is much weaker than Snape + Bella, held off Gellert.

@arkhamasylum3 has pointed out it's conjecture to say they're better than Newt, we have little to go off in regards to him besides his duel against Gellert, his only real feat which shows him as vastly more impressive than either of the duo, so no he's not "much weaker". This is ignoring the fact that while Newt performed admirably he was ultimately not even a challenge for Grindelwald, who was always pressing the offensive and in no danger of losing. In addition Grindelwald without the Elder Wand isn't close to Dumbledore or Voldemort.

Feats for Dumbledore defeating 6, not 1 or 2, high tiers?

Based off Grindelwald without the EW fighting evenly with 20 Aurors yet him being beneath both members of the duo they should take 6 quite comfortably even solo. Only 8 would be a challenge to 1 individual member, but either still solos.

Avatar image for richard96
#26 Edited by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77:

“You clearly did not put a lot of thought into this argument, they all went flying off their feats,”

That doesn’t mean they were completely defeated.

“if not for Harry's intervention would not have survived.”

Proofs?

“False, Tonks performed significantly better against Bellatrix than Harry, contending with her for a period of time and she's a low tier Auror, a new recruit amongst they're weakest ranks. Aurors can compare to high tiers, face it.”

Tonks is by no means a low tier auror, lol.

“Which didn't phase Voldemort against the trio, or Grindelwald against 20 Aurors, or his strike team feat in FB 2. Numbers don't matter when they're all one shot fodder, it'll take considerably more to overwhelm them.”

For the last time, Snape, Bella, mc Gonagall etc etc are NOT fodder aurors.

“has pointed out it's conjecture to say they're better than Newt,”

You can argue newt > Bella or newt > snape (even if I strongly doubt it), but you can’t argue newt > Bella + Snape. Clearly newt is much weaker than a team Bella + Snape. So if newt held off Gellert, Bella + Snape can decisively hold off Dumbledore or Voldemort, at least for a while.

“This is ignoring the fact that while Newt performed admirably he was ultimately not even a challenge for Grindelwald, who was always pressing the offensive and in no danger of losing.”

Yet he held off him for a bit, even parrying some spells. He was not fodder for him, like Snape or Bella aren’t fodder for Dumbledore or Voldemort, like you are claiming.

“In addition Grindelwald without the Elder Wand isn't close to Dumbledore or Voldemort.”

He isn’t even far from them. Until some time ago people thought even Gellert was stronger than Voldemort. That isn’t true, but grindelwald gave Dumbledore the fight of his life. Yes, he had the EW, but also Dumbledore had the EW vs Voldemort, and he just stalemated him, or at most held a slight advantage. He didn’t stomp him.

“Based off Grindelwald without the EW fighting evenly with 20 Aurors yet him being beneath both members of the duo they should take 6 quite comfortably even solo. Only 8 would be a challenge to 1 individual member, but either still solos.”

8 high tiers > 20 featless aurors. Also, the fight was interrupted, so we didn’t even know if Gellert would have beaten them all.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#27 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@richard96: That doesn’t mean they were completely defeated.

They were lying on the floor helpless at his mercy.

Proofs?

I'll provide a quote later but Harry pulls off the IC which causes Voldemort to turn his attention to Harry instead, right after he ragdolls the combined might of the trio.

Tonks is by no means a low tier auror, lol.

She was newly graduated as of OOTP, was low tier in the hierarchy and lacked field experience, she's literally an average Auror, there's no evidence to the contrary.

For the last time, Snape, Bella, mc Gonagall etc etc are NOT fodder aurors.

They only operate marginally above them lol.

You can argue newt > Bella or newt > snape (even if I strongly doubt it), but you can’t argue newt > Bella + Snape. Clearly newt is much weaker than a team Bella + Snape. So if newt held off Gellert, Bella + Snape can decisively hold off Dumbledore or Voldemort, at least for a while.

Newt has no Anti Feats which suggest inferiority to even the duo combined, you're committing the fallacy of assuming he's inferior to fit with your headcanon but providing no actual evidence. I'm not saying he's better than them but you're doing a shitty job of proving he's not,

Yet he held off him for a bit, even parrying some spells. He was not fodder for him, like Snape or Bella aren’t fodder for Dumbledore or Voldemort, like you are claiming.

He was still stomped and never had a chance, regardless of whether he parried spells or not, he was merely delaying the inevitable. Bellatrix was overwhelmed by a fraction of Dumbledore's power, Snape was one shotted by Dumbledore and Voldemort casually ragdolled a trio who shit all over Bellatrix, the two are laughably far above any of these guys and Grindelwald having one or two attacks parried by a Wizard of undefined skill is not a good argument to the contrary. Grindelwald should be used as the anchor to show Newt is far above these guys, not as a way to lower Gellert.

He isn’t even far from them.

With the EW he isn't, base Grindelwald is.

Until some time ago people thought even Gellert was stronger than Voldemort.

Which is in large part due to many people being idiots and doesn't prove anything.

That isn’t true, but grindelwald gave Dumbledore the fight of his life.

With the Elder Wand.

Yes, he had the EW, but also Dumbledore had the EW vs Voldemort, and he just stalemated him, or at most held a slight advantage. He didn’t stomp him.

You seem to be arguing the EW isn't a potent amp. Just to render this invalid you cite Grindelwald shaving his attacks parried by Newt as evidence they can't stomp Bellatrix and other high tiers despite all the other instances painting them as being able to. Furthermore Newt only held off base Gellert but was casually overwhelmed by EW Grindelwald with the backing of his brother, a top tier Auror while Gellert was disinterested and only using a fraction of his power, an evidently large disparity which shows that using base Gellert as a metric for these guys is faulty at best.

8 high tiers > 20 featless aurors.

Aurors aren't featless but ok. 8 high tiers are probably marginally better and thus can take base Gellert, EW amped Grindelwald, Dumbledore and Voldemort however all solo them.

Also, the fight was interrupted, so we didn’t even know if Gellert would have beaten them all.

Hence why I said he fought them evenly.

Avatar image for richard96
#28 Edited by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77:

“They were lying on the floor helpless at his mercy.”

The passage of the book?

“She was newly graduated as of OOTP, was low tier in the hierarchy and lacked field experience, she's literally an average Auror, there's no evidence to the contrary.”

Lol, it doesn’t mean sh!t. She was gifted, like Harry. Hierarchy doesn’t mean jack. Harry and hermione aren’t even graduated, yet they are stronger than many aurors. The evidence of the contrary are simply her feats, like surviving Bellatrix multiple times.

“They only operate marginally above them loL”

You are either trolling or you don’t know what are you talking about. Snape and Bellatrix are clearly described as prodigies, and they are vastly above an average wizard. This ridiculous denial has to stop.

“Newt has no Anti Feats which suggest inferiority to even the duo combined, you're committing the fallacy of assuming he's inferior to fit with your headcanon but providing no actual evidence. I'm not saying he's better than them but you're doing a shitty job of proving he's not,”

Have you ever heard of hype?

“He was still stomped and never had a chance, regardless of whether he parried spells or not, he was merely delaying the inevitable.“

Well, you are claiming Dumbledore or Voldemort can curbstomp in a move multiple high tiers, while Gellert can’t do the same with newt...If newt can avoid being one shotted by Gellert, multiple high tier can definitely do the same with Voldemort or Dumbledore. Just logic.

“Snape was one shotted by Dumbledore”

While ridiculously pre prime and taken by surprise.

“and Voldemort casually ragdolled a trio who shit all over Bellatrix,”

After having fought with them for a decent amount of time,

“Grindelwald should be used as the anchor to show Newt is far above these guys,”

Snape and bellatrix as well as mc gonagall have far better hype than newt.

“Furthermore Newt only held off base Gellert”

Ah then now newt held off Gellert? Decide yourself.

“but was casually overwhelmed by EW Grindelwald with the backing of his brother, a top tier Auror while Gellert was disinterested and only using a fraction of his power, an evidently large disparity which shows that using base Gellert as a metric for these guys is faulty at best.”

Grindelwald used an high tier spell there, but yes, you are right. But if the EW is a so strong amp, you are also to claim base Voldemort >> base Dumbledore.

“Aurors aren't featless but ok. 8 high tiers are probably marginally better and thus can take base Gellert, EW amped Grindelwald, Dumbledore and Voldemort however all solo them.”

8 high tier are comfortably above 20 average aurors. Base Gellert should at least be comparable to Voldemort or Dumbledore.

Avatar image for alphaq
#29 Posted by AlphaQ (6066 posts) - - Show Bio

Eh, I think the duo can probably do it. Voldemort was beating three duelists at this level while his magic was nerfed by Harry's sacrifice and one-shotted them when he got mad. Dumbledore is even stronger than Voldemort and seems much better at multitasking during a duel.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#30 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@richard96: The passage of the book?

Don't have access to my copy RN, will provide it later, not that your deserving of evidence considering the shear idiocy yet simultaneous arrogance you show in this post.

Lol, it doesn’t mean sh!t. She was gifted, like Harry.

Every Auror is gifted, they have to get top grades at Hogwarts, they have to spend three years in investigative and combative magic programmes ect, there's no proof Tonks is anything other than what the series portrays her as, a low tier Auror.

Hierarchy doesn’t mean jack.

In the case of Auror's who are literally designated based on combative efficiency and intellect yes it does.

Harry and hermione aren’t even graduated, yet they are stronger than many aurors.

Based on?

The evidence of the contrary are simply her feats, like surviving Bellatrix multiple times.

And why can't that be applied to all Aurors who are intended to be the elite and Tonks was never portrayed as extraordinary.

You are either trolling or you don’t know what are you talking about. Snape and Bellatrix are clearly described as prodigies, and they are vastly above an average wizard. This ridiculous denial has to stop.

>Claims I don't know what I'm talking about for saying Auror's are only marginally below Snape and Bellatrix.

>Thinks Aurors, the elites are average wizards.

Ironic...

Have you ever heard of hype?

I mean it's not as if hype is less important than feats. Oh wait, it is. Newt was never hyped up sure but he has the feats to suggest he's a top tier.

Well, you are claiming Dumbledore or Voldemort can curbstomp in a move multiple high tiers, while Gellert can’t do the same with newt...If newt can avoid being one shotted by Gellert, multiple high tier can definitely do the same with Voldemort or Dumbledore. Just logic.

Except there's nothing that suggests that anyone here is better than Newt, nor is there anything that suggests Gellert a base is on Dumbledore and Voldemort's level, all there is is tons of evidence suggesting the opposite.

While ridiculously pre prime and taken by surprise.

A) Nothing suggests a major power increase and given all he did was teach at school for an extended period of time I'm not convinced there should be one either.

B) He was aware of the fact that Dumbledore was going to be there, he had his wand out so forgive me if I don' take that seriously.

After having fought with them for a decent amount of time,

Which I already addressed if you could actually read.

Snape and bellatrix as well as mc gonagall have far better hype than newt.

So Newt has one great feat that eclipses anything they have doe and you answer it with "muh hype".

Ah then now newt held off Gellert? Decide yourself.

Read properly, I always said he did, he however was getting tooled and had no chance of winning but parried spells from him.

Grindelwald used an high tier spell there, but yes, you are right.

Wonderful, concession accepted, moving on you've conceded a major point, it isn't looking good for your case mate.

But if the EW is a so strong amp, you are also to claim base Voldemort >> base Dumbledore.

A notion supported by the text yes.

8 high tier are comfortably above 20 average aurors.

A falsehood as I've proven by now.

Base Gellert should at least be comparable to Voldemort or Dumbledore.

You conceded that he's a far cry away from EW Grindelwald who is subsequently below either of the duo yet are now saying he's close. HMMM.

Avatar image for richard96
#31 Posted by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77:

No, I am not keeping in this farce. I needed to read only few lines of your last nonsensical and delirious comment to have a strong headache. I am out.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#32 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@richard96: No, I am not keeping in this farce.

Concession accepted.

I needed to read only few lines of your last nonsensical and delirious comment to have a strong headache. I am out.

Well given it's so nonsensical and delirious you shouldn't be debunked at every turn when trying to counter and should not find it particularly taxing to respond to.

Avatar image for richard96
#33 Posted by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77:

“Well given it's so nonsensical and delirious you shouldn't be debunked at every turn when trying to counter and should not find it particularly taxing to respond to”

Saying bullsh!ts isn’t taxing for sure.

Avatar image for arkhamasylum3
#34 Edited by ArkhamAsylum3 (2856 posts) - - Show Bio

JS77 ragdolling.

However Voldemort>Base Dumbledore is one of the more amusing claims I've heard.

Avatar image for bdelloidgrain2
#35 Posted by bdelloidgrain2 (1410 posts) - - Show Bio

Tom and Albus get overwhelmed. They can’t deal with so many skilled foes.

I agree. I think there are too many skilled wizards and witches here.

Avatar image for doofasa
#36 Posted by Doofasa (1715 posts) - - Show Bio

The duo wins in a tough fight.

Voldemort has already defeated 3 of the best of the team whilst he was nerfed by Harry's sacrifice. Once he got mad he one shot all three of them.

Dumbledore has always been superior to Voldemort, if it is prime Dumbledore then he potentially solos.

Avatar image for richard96
#37 Posted by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@arkhamasylum3:

I think it can be argued that Voldemort may be somehow more powerful than base Dumbledore. In fact despite having the EW Dumbledore wasn’t able to take a decisive win against him, and also in the book if it wasn’t for Fawkes Albus would have died.

Avatar image for mygod101
#38 Posted by MYGOD101 (225 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, base Voldemort is more powerful than base Dumbledore that is fact and proven. Then there are Dumbledore's statements of Voldemort being better than him, then there is the duel were Voldemort was shown better than him.

Avatar image for tomtheawesome123
#39 Posted by tomtheawesome123 (1491 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77:I want to applaud you for your nice arguments on the topic.

I can see why you would get angry at that person.

Avatar image for limitlesssigil
#40 Posted by LimitlessSigil (2824 posts) - - Show Bio

Duo wins

Avatar image for mygod101
#41 Posted by MYGOD101 (225 posts) - - Show Bio

I feel like if numbers could have overwhelmed someone like Voldemort I believe they would have done something like that. the Ministry offered Harry Aurors to protect him and Harry laughed at that and declined that offer. 50% of the people on team 1 Voldemort has already casually defeated.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#42 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for bayman007
#43 Posted by Bayman007 (1137 posts) - - Show Bio

The duo get my vote

Avatar image for arkhamasylum3
#44 Posted by ArkhamAsylum3 (2856 posts) - - Show Bio

@arkhamasylum3:

I think it can be argued that Voldemort may be somehow more powerful than base Dumbledore. In fact despite having the EW Dumbledore wasn’t able to take a decisive win against him, and also in the book if it wasn’t for Fawkes Albus would have died.

I went over this in another thread.

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/forums/battles-7/gellert-grindelwald-runs-the-gauntlet-1917950/?page=4#js-message-167

@mygod101 said:

Yes, base Voldemort is more powerful than base Dumbledore that is fact and proven. Then there are Dumbledore's statements of Voldemort being better than him, then there is the duel were Voldemort was shown better than him.

Yeah no. We already went over this in the above thread.

Regardless I'm not interested in having a discussion with either of you due to the fact that I have others to respond to so don't come back with a response.

Avatar image for helloman
#45 Posted by Helloman (27121 posts) - - Show Bio

The high tiers win.

Avatar image for tomtheawesome123
#46 Posted by tomtheawesome123 (1491 posts) - - Show Bio

@jacensolo77: The guy was so patronizing.

Its interesting how the people who vote for high tiers in this thread are the ones unwilling to accept discussions. Regardless, I was one of the people who thought the duo would get stomped until I saw your posts.

However, that being said I will give you a suggestion. Next time when you argue with these type of people make sure you take the time to find your sources. During your debate with Richard if you had provided passages from the book he probably would not have acted that way. If you don't have the books on you then search them online and in some cases you can torrent them.

Avatar image for tomtheawesome123
#47 Posted by tomtheawesome123 (1491 posts) - - Show Bio

anyone want to CAV this? I will take the duo's side.

Avatar image for jacensolo77
#48 Posted by JacenSolo77 (922 posts) - - Show Bio

@tomtheawesome123:

The guy was so patronizing.

Yup.

Its interesting how the people who vote for high tiers in this thread are the ones unwilling to accept discussions. Regardless, I was one of the people who thought the duo would get stomped until I saw your posts.

Glad I convinced you and yeah the majority of people in this thread claiming the high tiers win haven't provided much in terms of actual reasoning.

:)

However, that being said I will give you a suggestion. Next time when you argue with these type of people make sure you take the time to find your sources.

Normally would be able to lol, but my copy of the HP series has literally vanished into thin air, going to have to search my house high and low to find it.

During your debate with Richard if you had provided passages from the book he probably would not have acted that way. If you don't have the books on you then search them online and in some cases you can torrent them.

I have a disdain for E-books ngl but they're useful in scenarios like this so I may use them for preparation purposes only.

Avatar image for richard96
#49 Edited by Richard96 (5579 posts) - - Show Bio

@arkhamasylum3:

Yeah but Fawkes can only do that if he's with Dumbledore. Fawkes didn't fly all the way to London and take Voldemort's Killing Curse in a mere second. that's absurd. The much more likely conclusion is that Dumbledore brought Fawkes with him and knew Fawkes could save him if he got into a situation like that so he set up less defences as he didn't feel they were necessary.

Do you mean this? What does it change if Albus deliberately brought Fawkes with him? It is obvious. Anyway, Fawkes saved him. Without her, Albus would have been killed by AK or injured by Voldemort's snake. Albus basically cheated. Also, he had the EW, hence he was considerably amped.

Avatar image for arkhamasylum3
#50 Posted by ArkhamAsylum3 (2856 posts) - - Show Bio

@richard96:

Do you mean this? What does it change if Albus deliberately brought Fawkes with him? It is obvious. Anyway, Fawkes saved him. Without her, Albus would have been killed by AK or injured by Voldemort's snake. Albus basically cheated. Also, he had the EW, hence he was considerably amped.

This doesn't address the part where I brought up Albus having other statues he could have used but chose not to nor does it address the part where I pointed out this only happened because Dumbledore knew Fawkes could save him in this scenario and thus probably didn't bother to set up other defences.

Nor does it address JK's general intent while writing the duel which should be made pretty obvioius by the chapter name.