No, it works with any two wands. Sirius literally never had a trial. I don't think you can make someone do something they are completely unable to do normally. That sounds like it would make it even harder to indict Death Eaters; the whole thing about memory manipulation is why submitting pensieve memories is not acceptable evidence.

 

There's the spell, 'Prior Incantato' which works to show the last spell of any wand (I think we only see it showing the previous spell, not any others), and 'Priori Incantatem' which is a rare effect which only occurs between brother wands and which forces one wand to 'replay' its spells in reverse. Easy to confuse, but somewhat different.

 

Because there wasn't doubt in Sirius' guilt, they literally found him laughing surrounded by a bunch of corpses, with over fifty eyewitnesses proclaiming to have seen him cornering Peter Pettigrew, who called Sirius out for betraying the Potters, before seemingly exploding and from whom they only found pieces, that is in addition to the evidence Dumbledore gave about being told that Sirius was the secret keeper of the Potters.

Even if they had used the spell, they would just have assumed that Sirius just used some dark magical object or perhaps even wandless magic. It's made clear in prisoner of Azkaban that the ministry evaluated the power Sirius had and the danger he posed extremely highly.

I kinda doubt it, as the mental state the imperius puts you in doesen't seem that reliable for tasks like that.

But we do know that you can retrieve memories for the Pensive through Legilimency.

Though I kinda doubt those would be enough evidence to ensure conviction as memories can be altered and even if you do show people commiting crimes in the name of Voldemort and do believe them to be real, the pensive doesen't actually show the person's state of mind, so them claiming they were under the Imperius wouldn't be refuted by that alone.

 

The canonical description of the effects of Polyjuice seems to support the idea that after the transformation, every single cell of the subject's body is a perfect copy of the target's cells, which in this case actually gives Harry a substantial boost in the amount of cells he has. It's definitively not just a change in appearance. My question is whether Polyjuice could be used to heal oneself from a serious injury, and I would be inclined to think that it could, but when you turn back, do you go back to having an injury, or are you healed?
I can't find anywhere it's explicitly stated how the user turns back to normal, but the only possible way they can retain their identity and memories is with the soul, so that at least makes sense. The soul, unchanged by the polyjuice, seems to store a recent instance of the body; we see this over and over again with Harry's parents appearing with the Resurrection Stone; we even see it with the ghosts in Hogwarts. Their souls seem to remember how they look the instant they died.
I've been looking since yesterday and at the moment I can only think that the polyjuice would save the subject from potentially any problem not related to the soul, but only temporarily. Does anyone else have any insight on this?

 

In GOF, when Moody bounces Malfoy around as a ferret, and McGonagall turns him back into a human, he is seen as carrying the effects of being bounced around after his return to human form. This suggests that injuries he gained as a ferret persisted as a human.

On the other hand, we know transfiguration magic is capable of having a healing effect in certain contexts, because healers have to know it.

I would suggest that in general, transfiguration is injury neutral, but that specific, targeted transfiguration can be used as part of healing.

On that basis I would be inclined to suggest that any injury would be carried over to your polyjuiced form, and vice versa.

 

Crouch jr. is polyjuiced into perfect Moody, injuries and all. This seems to point at polyjuice overriding all existing conditions with those of the donor of the hair. On the other hand, George lost his ear while polyjuiced as Harry, and that didn't grow back when the juice ran out; so injuries gained while polyjuiced definitely carry over.

 

Polyjuice is transfiguration? It seems like a decidedly inferior form, given that you have to brew a potion for a month, you have to have DNA, it's a temporary effect, and you can only turn into other humans. I'm not sure what the advantage of the potion is if you can just wave a wand, but since I don't think we ever see human-human transfiguration in the books, I can only think that the reason the potion was developed and remains in use is because human-human transfiguration is exceedingly difficult or impossible. Perhaps it's the requirement of the DNA sample, and no one knows how to integrate that into a spell, only a potion.
I genuinely thought it wasn't transfiguration because it doesn't take the clothes into account, and every time we see human-animal transfiguration, the clothes are part of it.

Those were scars. They're part of the current appearance of Moody, even though they're not written in his DNA, I suppose. I would imagine that his soul-image has the scars just like Nearly Headless Nick. I'm starting to think it's possible that the DNA sample is only a means by which the potion gets the soul-image.

Lupin said there was no means of healing it because it had been cursed off. I genuinely don't know if this applies, since I'm still trying to figure out whether or not polyjuice can heal people, but even if it can heal people, I wouldn't know how it would heal something like that. That makes me think of something else, though. When Harry pretended to be Crabbe, his scar must have been gone and there's supposed to be no magical means of removing a curse mark. It seems that when under the effects of the polyjuice, your own soul-image is nowhere to be seen, but curses can still damage your soul-image. It would have been pretty interesting if it had actually removed Harry's ear instead of George's, but it seems that it's just a copy of the image rather than a voodoo doll.

 

Also a missing leg and eye. Though sure, you can argue at which point an injury becomes a scar...

 

Does Homenum Revelio work on Harry's Invisibility Cloak? In a fic I'm writing, I had McGonagall find Harry under the cloak using the spell, and I'm getting a lot of reviews about how the spell shouldn't have worked with Harry's cloak. It's driving me crazy. I distinctly remember Dumbledore being able to see under the Cloak in PS & COS, one during the Mirror of Erised scene and the other at Hagrid's Hut.

A quick googling session suggests that Rowling herself may have confirmed that Homenum Revelio could work on the Cloak, though I can't seem to find the source.

Thoughts?

 

I would not be remotely surprised if Harry was not as good at hiding as he thought when he was 11 and 12. A little flicker of movement, a footstep- Dumbledore probably picked up on something he thought would be easily missed, and perhaps for most other people it would be, but Dumbledore's aware that he has the cloak and aware of the kind of things he's going to do with it. If he ever directly said he could see through it that was just a trick to get Harry to behave for once.

 

Is the Cloak an Deathly Hallow in your fic?

If yes, then I don't see why not. If Moody's eye can see through it in GoF when it is a DH, I don't see why a HR wouldn't work. If no, then you are all good and the reviewers are idiots. All the Cloak does it obscure vision. It doesn't stop sound or the effects of magic on the wearer or the effects of magic cast by the wearer.

 

Yes it works. At one point Dumbeldore detects Harry under the cloak and according to Rowling he silently used the spell.

The cloak in general doesn't seem to add any concealment effect beyond invisibility, as animals can still detect him, and Moody's eye can let you see through it.

As a Hallow it got 2 unique abilitied compared to regular cloaks.
1. It's magic doesn't wear off, meaning it still offers perfect invisibility after centuries.

2. It's not affected by magic, including being unable to be summoned. This does not mean that it makes you immune to spells while wearing it. Being hit whkle wearing it affect you just as much as a spell hitting your clothes. We see Dumbeldore use the body bind curse on Harry while he was under the cloak, just as Draco disarmed him. Likewise you can use magic while you sre under it, as we see Harry take out a bunch of Death Eaters during the Battle of Hogwarts

 

Some questions I have:

Question I
- From what the books tell us, all other things being equal, a werewolf is a preferential predator that prefers wizards or witches to any other prey.
- From the way Sirius describes it, a werewolf is basically no threat to a transformed Animagus; they'll hang out with them like it's no thing.
- Being bitten by a werewolf infects you with lycanthropy, if you're a human.
- Does being bitten by a werewolf when you're in a transformed Animagus form cause you to contract Lycanthropy?

Evidence suggests no, because I find it hard to believe that Sirius didn't get bitten by Remus during their fight in PoA, but I could be wrong?

Question II
- Arithmancy is a subject concerned with the magical properties of numbers, numerology, and (apparently) predicting the future.
- Given the third of these three things, would it make thematic sense/make sense in-universe, for one to make use of it at the gambling table? (I ask, because I want to include it as a background element).
- Related to the above, could it be used to predict the weather?

Question III
- Broadly speaking, how does one go about incorporating elements from pulp 1930's stories (Conan the Barbarian, mostly) into a story, without causing it to grind up the backstory too much?

Question IV
- Given that every Centaur we see within the narrative scope of the books is very similar characterization wise (excepting as it relates to working with humans, for Firenze), what would a rebellious teenager look like, in a centaur herd?
- For that matter, how does/might the characterization of a female centaur differ? I don't think that we ever meet one, in the books.

Question V
- Is there any reason that a Cockatrice couldn't be roughly the size of an emu, when full-grown?

Question VI
- It's mentioned that Ghosts for the most part exist because they chose not to move on, at the moment of their death. But is their any reason that a ghost can't move on, supposing that the thing that convinced them to stay (a task left uncompleted, say) was actually concluded?

 

It is only shown to have an effect on humans, but the werewolves only ever hunt humans, so we wouldn't really know.

If there's a subject that's commonly taught in schools that can help you with gambling, then there are going to be built-in counters for that. Perhaps your character knows something that the casino doesn't, though.

Characters predict the weather with divination; I don't know how arithmancy would help.

The more backstory you want to include, the longer the total story has to be, basically. It's always a balance of delivering information and telling what's going on in the present.

We don't see much of them as individuals, so what we see isn't really a matter of personality so much as philosophy. They're tribalistic in the sense that they don't trust wizards, keep to themselves, and make decisions as a group for the benefit of the group. A rebellious teenager would probably leave the woods to join wizarding society in some sense.

In Greek Mythology, there weren't any, so you could go with that handwave. I would guess if there are any, though, they're probably staying within the centaur encampment while the braves go hunting (it's not super ambiguous that centaurs are supposed to be Native Americans) and we don't see them because they're being protected from dangerous creatures and wizards. They might be less proud than the braves and they might not be the driving force behind the tribalist philosophy, but ultimately they would choose to live among their own kind rather than among wizards.

No. I've seen pictures of them where they were roughly that big. If Rowling borrows a creature from other sources, then within reason, it's fair to use those other sources for more information about them.

 

I dont think it would spread the curse, but werwolves are still dark creatures and their bites and scratches will leave lasting scars that are very hard to heal. I wouldn't even be suprised if as an animagus you could contract a minor amount of the curse like Bill did when Greyback attacked him in his human form.

Apparently it involves complicated number charts and Hermione calls it 'the toughest subject there is", so my personal assumption that the vast majority of people probably could predict things at a gamble table, but that it would include them having to take notes and would probably take quite a bit of time. So it would be of no reas use in either muggle or wizarding casinos. Though I dont see anything wrong with an arithmancy prodigy being able to do it in his head, but I assume most would be caught after winnings grow suspcious. I'd think using it to game the muggle stock markert seems like it would be a safer choice as that kind of thing probably isn't even illegal.

Most likely yes. One of the reasons Hermione preferred over Arithmancy is that there is a lot less guesswork involved, I'd think something as straight forward as the weather which even muggles can predict should be within the scope of arithmancy. Obviously it shouldn't account for any changes by magic unless the Arithmancer factored them in. Like the presence of a thunderbird in the area.

Traditionally they'd probably be inclided to drinking, which in turn makes them more violent and libidous(though I wouldn't make them rapey). I'd personally just interpret them as having a weak tolerance to alcohol similar to house-elves, which is why most centaurs would avoid it.

Female centaurs are actually confirmed to be exist, as sayin there are no female centaurs was a wrong answer on a test on Rowling's website. Though considering how much Centaurs mistrust wizards, I assume they try to keep females away from them. I wouldn't characterize them too differntly, maybe a bit less agressive and more trusting. I also wouldn't be suprised if they didn't learn archery and were rather more responsible for magical healing(which is something Centaurs are reputed to be well versed in), and considsering the myth of Chiron I assume they'd probably practise some herbology too.

There is no canon scale for them, so you can pretty much go wild.

It is considered an unqise decision to become a ghost, so I assume it's a decision you're stuck with. As for why, I think it's simply a result of how the imprint of the deceased wizards attaches itself to the material world.

 

What elements?
If you mean a sort of mythical pre-history then a simple line or two sprinkled say when referring to a history assignment is probably best. Same way you might hint at an Arthurian Britain. Or a mention of a sorcerer god-king in the same breath as Emeric the Evil.

If it isn't directly related to plot or integral to a significant AU then geek out if you must, but limit yourself. Another thing to note is Harry Potter takes the mickey out of myths (and avoids religion).

I would say embed it in centaur society. Butting heads with elders. Testing their strength. Maybe this is in contests, like the bow. Maybe seeking glory/killing dangers in the Forbidden Forest, against orders. Maybe it means reading the wrong stars, I like the idea that there are taboos in star-gazing/reading the future. Another possibility is that maybe centaurs, like the Greeks of old, start new colonies and so maybe he's agitating for a split and the formation of new herd/colony elsewhere in the world.

Given we never see one and the myths I go to the idea of a harem. As in "housed" separately, secluded/guarded. I would go with more of a separate female power structure (what that looks like I have no idea). If you want a young one to pare with the rebel (and you want to avoid her either being won, or the matriarchs dictating) then I was amused by the idea of her trying to win over a mate with her fermented mare's milk. Which might tie nicely to centaurs liking their drink (or preferring wine).

 

Given that Divination is a thing, I think that if Arithmancy could genuinely predict the future it would be thrown in with that. Instead, I think that Arithmancy is probably just probability. Wizards can probably still count cards tho, and I'd imagine that there'd be more than one way to cheat at a gambling table.

 

Several times in the books, wizards show surprise that muggle pictures don’t move, but I recall reading that portraits are enchanted to move/become sentient. Is that an inconsistency, are the wizards misinformed, or was I wrong about the creation process? They can’t move while they’re being painted, right?

 

If by several times you mean Ron saying it several times, it's rather believable as he is pureblood and he's certainly not one doing the charm work.

So every time he actually comes in contact with newspapers/portraits/photos they are already moving.

I don't recall any adult saying that, and I doubt any of them would, since they're probably more knowledgeable on the topic.

 

Thank you, haha… been a little while since I read them. I knew it was an easily answerable question