OK. Most hardcore douchefuck fans of Harry Potter, aka the people who reside at MuggleNet.com, believe that Dumbledore would "kick Gandalf's stupid ass", easily.

I want to see what DLP thinks.

First off, lets set some parameters. If you have not at least watched the movies of Lord of the Rings, don't waste your time with either a response or a vote. If you have at least watched the movies but have not read the book, keep the following in mind:

- Gandalf (in the books) does not fear the Witch-King as portrayed in the movies. The only person he 'fears' is Sauron, and even then he (as Gandalf the White) states to Gimli, Aragorn and Legolas that unless they stand before the throne of Sauron at Barud-Dur they will find no one else stronger than he. He doesn't show fear but rather respect.

- Gandalf's staff is never "broken" - the source of his power is his staff and he breaks Saruman's after he returns as the White; using logic, we can assume that the only person capable of breaking his staff in a fair fight would be Sauron.

- Gandalf is a Maiar, which means he is apart of the Ainur, whom are the servants of Eru (God) and in Tolkien's world, which is a Christian story, means that they are angels. The Valar would be akin to Archangels except they also have the power to create things (not give life however) and the Maiar (Of which Sauron, Gandalf and Saruman are apart of) are the lesser angels. Gandalf "Unleashed" would be a devastating foe, possibly even greater than Sauron, which brings the next point.

- Gandalf's power is locked in his staff. This is not Gandalf Unleashed but Gandalf the White - remember that. Do not confuse Gandalf without his restraints (someone who would rival Sauron) with what the books present, a Gandalf whose power is locked up and his spirit encased in an old man's body. Gandalf (and Saruman and three other wizards) swore an oath to not match Sauron equally with power and so the Gandalf presented in the books is the Gandalf you should use when thinking of Dumbledore versus Gandalf. If he was truly unleashed, this conversation would be pointless, IMO.

Some points to remember about Dumbledore:

- One thing MuggleNetters keep pointing out is the fact that "Dumbledore has the unbeatable wand" - true, Dumbledore, while living, possessed the Eldar Wand and that should be remembered. But at the same time, recognize that Grindelwald possessed it before Dumbledore and Dumbledore was victorious when they fought. The wand is therefore, not infallible and while it is an excellent source of power, does not contend with Gandalf's actual immortality. Some want to contend that Dumbledore can match Gandalf's immortality with his wand's infallibility. This would be wrong.

- MuggleNetters point out that Dumbledore is a "master manipulator" - Gandalf, you will find, along with Aragorn, are also manipulators. There is a great difference between them though, and that is, Dumbledore, even after he "gave it up" believes strongly in the greater good. That may be a strength in itself because Dumbledore is not "wholly good" as Gandalf - there is no tarnish to Gandalf, as there is on Dumbledore. Gandalf will not sacrifice a hobbit, let alone a human being for "an overall victory". He would not sacrifice Gollum. Dumbledore however, would willingly send the Light Side's strongest tool to its death to ensure a victory and has ruined the lives of several people through both inaction (love that stayed his hand during Grindelwald's terror) and coercion (playing Snape's emotions to get a spy). This is a strength, as far as I'm concerned - being able to do what it takes to get the job done, regardless.

- Dumbledore is the only person Voldemort fears. If you put stock in Voldemort's power (I don't, I think he's a chump), then the antagonist of the story is fearful of Dumbledore. In Lord of the Rings, while Sauron acknowledges Gandalf's power, the true person Sauron fears comes from the line of Elendil, Aragorn, who is the last of a dying breed (the Numenor, who have been the reason for Sauron's downfall two times). If you think Sauron and Voldemort are equal in terms of power (lol), or if you think Voldemort is a stronger villain, then this may be an important showcasing of power.

- Dumbledore uses magic more often. Gandalf uses his powers sparingly (moreso than in the movies but still not that often). Dumbledore is a Transfiguration Master, or we can at least assume so, since he taught Transfiguration and the bulk of his ownage of Voldemort utilized Transfiguration. Would he be able to out-magick Gandalf? Dumbledore is a "true wizard", in the sense that magic is involved. In Tolkien's world, people call Gandalf a wizard because that's what they think he is. Gandalf of course plays along but he is of a spiritual power.


So the question is: Gandalf the White versus Dumbledore - who would win?

 

I'd also like to note that in The Lord of the Rings, magic is very different. It's more... lowkey then in the HP universe. Gandalf doesn't actually toss a fireball in the books like he does in the movies. That kind of magic is beyond him. Lesson: Flashy magic is not what Gandalf does.

 

Expanded, for anyone who cares.

 

Gandalf does - take a look at "The Hobbit" for instance. When Gandalf, 13 dwarves and 1 hobbit (Bilbo) are trapped in trees, because of some goblins and wolves, Gandalf makes fire and sets the wolves on fire (and indirectly, also the forest). And he kills the head-goblin with a stroke of lightning. That's kinda flashy, don't you think?

I think that Gandalf would win from Dumbledore. Dumbledore would be a formidable opponent, but I think that Gandalf has more experience (he is a lot older than Dumbledore) and even as his power isn't as "quick" as Dumbledores', I think that he can defend himself against lots of spells (I can't imagine that Gandalf would be defeated by a stupefy or something). But it's like comparing apples with peaches - their magic is so different that you can't really say who will win.

 

Gandalf would win, easily. In terms of sheer power he would be on a whole other level, especially since he can fight against a spirit of fire and shadow to victory (though he technically 'died' afterwards) and survive what has to be a several mile long fall. Add in the sword he wields and his overall battle prowess and you've got a powerful foe with experience and effective weapons. Dumbledore on the other hand... He's an old man, without the benefits of being a Maiar to counteract that, and he can barely fight Voldemort to a standstill.

Since I've mentioned him I'll probably have to say something about Voldemort now XD. If you compare Voldemort and the LoTR enemies, I reckon you could draw comparisons in power between him and the Witch King. Both are subject to prophecy regarding their own demise, both inspire terror and panic at their appearance and both have interesting methods of flight at their disposal. That said, since Dumbledore could only fight him to a standstill, and was unwilling to kill him, it would be an accurate estimate that Dumbledore could match a Nazgul or the Witch King if he could counter the weapons they use.

On the manipulative scale Dumbledore does have the advantage, given Gandalf's unwillingness to sacrifice others, but Gandalf also has the contacts and ability to give as much backing to others as possible (especially with the visit to Lothlorien).

Aekiel

 

I just don't know what to do about power in Rowling's world. In Tolkien's world, as far as I'm concerned, it's clear, cut and dry. Manwe = Melkor > Weakened!Melkor-Morgoth > Sauron > Gandalf > Witch-King > Saruman. You could possibly make arguments that the Witch-King is equal to Gandalf, since Denethor and Gandalf discuss Gandalf's past fear of the "Witch-King of Angmar" and Gandalf's response of "it's possible" when Denethor mocks Gandalf, questioning whether or not he has any useful information or if he's just trying to get out of fighting the Witch-King.

You could also say that it'd be impossible for Gandalf to defeat the Witch-King, since the prophecy states "No man shall defeat him" - some will debate that Gandalf is not a "man" either but I think the context of the prophecy doesn't distinguish race but rather sex (male and female) and both Maiar and Valar take a gender and Valar do "marry" and Maiar have produced children.

With Rowling's world, how can anyone respect Voldemort when he does nothing. He never "shines" like Rowling is so fond of telling us. He has no wiggle room as she promised. He murders Charity Babbage, Mad-Eye Moody and Severus Snape and his death total is weak. He attacks a school. Sauron single-handedly destroyed an entire civilization in a few years and forced the Valar to call upon God to remove the Blessed Lands from the earth. His actions brought down the "Atlantis" of Middle-Earth, killed off the line of kings (again debatable, since women could not rule at the time and Aragorn is technically from the line that would have been the "true line").

He was the Chief Lieutenant of the Evil that marred the world from the beginning (Melkor) - you can't get any more evil than that without being Melkor. Voldemort's Salazar Slytherin's heir. Wow. It's right up there with being the son of a school governor. It does nothing - Parseltongue isn't that great a gift apparently, since Ronald fucking Weasley can replicate it and get through the only defensive spells the old cunt could come up with. The House of Gaunt is bereft of anything save a Locket and a Ring and they're mentally retarded and insane.

Sauron's just pure fucking dag-nasty evil. He kills kittens. He fooled nine kings and men of importance into serving him and becoming his dread assassins and lieutenants. Voldemort has Lucius Malfoy and Severus Snape and Bellatrix Lestrange, who amount to nothing, is killed by Voldemort and gets owned by Molly Weasley.

Real fucking evil.

 

I think it's hard to make a comparison due to the two very different magic systems. Sure, HP magic is far flashier, but Lotr magic, although being more subtle, has far more potential for destruction.

Sauron outweighs Voldemort by several miles. Although I am a fan of the Dark Lord, I must stress the point. Sauron's powers of corruption and deceit, coupled with his sheer raw fury would send Voldemort scurrying for Merope. Voldemort could apprentice under Sauron in a well done crossover actually.

Gandalf the White, since we must consider them at full power, is restrained by the shackles placed upon him. Although he is a superior being, he must act as if he were a part of Middle earth. That being said, if a goblin arrow gives him another hole to breathe through, Gandalf must pass on. A maiar would not flinch from a Goblin arrow.

There is one issue which could cause a HP wizard to beat an Istari. The Avada Kedavra spell, which cannot be blocked ends all life it touches. If someone managed to cast the killing curse before Gandalf turns him into something unnatural, Gandalf's middle earth form would die and he would return to the undying lands. Dumbledore does not use the power however, foolish little coward that he is, does not use the spell. As such, Gandalf would wipe the floor with him.

EDIT: I just voted. Poor little Dumbledore, no one has faith in him.

 

Here I voted for Dumbledore. It's one of my favorite character he doesn't deserve to be raped by Gandalf.

Nah, you can't compare Dumbledore's magic vs Gandalf's magic. Dumbledore would win pretty much because Gandalf would be surprised by this unknown magic. After 2000 years he wouldn't expect something unknown to crop up.

Dumbledore can:
- Animate Gandalf's clothes.
- Accio his staff
- Transfigure the ground beneath Gandalf to trap him.
- Freeze him apparently wandlessly and wordlessly (like what he did before he died in HBP)
- Mute him, so Gandalf cannot use his words of power.
- Transfigure and animate dozen of animals, etc.

What chances Gandalf would have over that?

 

Somehow, I don't think Gandalf swings that way. Although his obsession with the halflings has been rumoured to go deeper than mere kindness, Lord Elrond stated that it was just average Mordor slander.

 

Dumbledore, simply because Harry Potter magic is more versatile, easier to use, carries no penalty (i.e. you don't get exhausted, you can keep using it ad nauseum) and just as powerful.

Most of the Middle-Earth magic seems to deal with Light and Darkness - epic battles of a spiritual nature, pitting will against will. It is not practical in the way Harry Potter magic is, which has a whole multitude of spells just for fighting. Add to that stuff like Transfiguration, apparition, and tons of useful charms and Gandalf will be stuck using his staff as a giant flashlight while Dumbledore is delivering the smackdown.

In addition to this, Gandalf is, as you said, not in his most powerful form, and is limited by it.

I do disagree with your assessment that Olorin would be able to rival Sauron though. Olorin's power was always said to be in wisdom, not might, and Sauron was one of the most powerful of the maiar.

1. The Hobbit is suspect source material, since Gandalf's character is so different in that book to the Lord of the Rings.

2. Gandalf sets pine cones on fire and chucks them at wolves. And he takes his time about it too - it would have been quicker to use matches. Hardly a fireball.

 

As far as I saw in the movies LOTR incantations are much longer than in Harry Potter. In the time Gandalf would cast one spell, Dumbledore could squeeze 3 or 4 (that's my opinion). It would look like this:
Gandalf: Powerful fires...
Dumbledore: Stupefy! Apparate
Gandalf: Unbeatable waters...
Dumbledore: Stupefy! Stupefy! Petrificus Totalus!

And so on. In my opinion, LOTR magic is not as fast as in Harry Potter, so in time, Dumbledore would win against Gandalf. Dumbledore could get away for some rest by apparating, he could turn himself nearly invisible by Dissillusionment Charm (sp?) As someone said, HP magic does not tire its user. Yes, Gandalf is most probably much more powerful than Dumbledore, but HP magic is much more practical, so the power difference does not matter. Anyways, that's just my opinion, which may be very wrong. I just think, that Gandalf the White would lose against Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore, because HP magic is much more practical ad easier to use. Also, let's not forget William Spaniel's rule for determinng who is going to win a tournament of Magic: The Gathering that states that "The player with the most difficult name in the top 8 will most probably win the said top 8."

If i am wrong about some, or all, LOTR stuff, then sorry.

 

Gandalf vs Balrog = Absolutely epic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnM4WA--GwU

Dumbledore vs Voldemort = Ok but doesn't give off that epic feeling

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6UABZA9ZpA&feature=related

I still haven't fully read Book 7 (Didn't like it much) but I don't see how Dumbledore could face up against a Balrog like Gandalf the grey did (Balrogs are Maiar aren't they? , not sure on that)

I could just see Gandalf the white telling Dumbledore that his wand is broken like he did Saruman so...yeah

Gandalf >>>>>>Dumbledore

Also if you compare the antagonists in both series well...Sauron is a hell of a lot more menacing than Voldemort (Come on he can't even kill a teenager)

Meh, if you want to compare fantasy wizards Gandalf vs Raistlin or something like that would be more appropriate.

Gandalf wins in the better character department as well.

 

All Gandalf has to do to stop Dumbledore from using magic is a word. I don't know of any incantations Gandalf uses in Lord of the Rings (movies). The only incantation used is one by Arwen Undomiel in Fellowship of the Ring and it's out of place and a power she doesn't have.

Elrond used his ring to make the waters flow and Gandalf added the horses in the book, for embellishment. Gandalf has a similar ring, except it's province is fire.

With a single word, he held off a Balrog. Gandalf doesn't "cast spells" - and if we were to utilize the movies thoughts on how wizards work, the fight between Saruman and Gandalf the Gray is not only quick but bloody in seconds. Gandalf is sent flying into the top of Orthanc within seconds and they both exchange blows that land on one another and actually do damage.

The fight is far quicker than any fight Dumbledore or Voldemort experience and is far more brutal.

And again, Saruman casts a fireball down on Gandalf in Return of the King, which Gandalf the White ignores without blinking. If we're to follow what the movies say - that there are no incantations and all one has to do is move their staff about - then there's absolutely no chance Dumbledore will win.

Gandalf ignores a fireball without receiving damage? W/e.

If we look at the books, we don't get that entirely - but there's always that potential. Gandalf drives off the Dark Lord's most powerful servants with a light.

You guys are pulling for strings when it comes to "long-winded incantations" and "good versus evil." Tolkien himself says both sides use both and that it doesn't matter their nature but rather their intent.

As for Sauron and Gandalf - the potential is always there. Tolkien himself says Gandalf would be a far more dangerous wizard with the ring and if he were to get it, he would supplant the Dark Lord and be far more powerful, but instead of entirely malicious he would be self-righteous, forcing his will upon others to pretty much the same effect.

It's pointless. Gandalf is a certified, approved messenger of God and "the surprise" of facing Dumbledore's magic wouldn't exist. He'd thunderclap Dumbledore's ass into next week.

 

Try this one:

Dumbledore vs Balrog.

 

All cross-universe comparisons suck.

 

Gandalf would win hands down,it would not even be a contest,one word and dumbledores wand would be broken or one word and dumbledore would be knocked out. That's all it would take.

 

Apples and Oranges, beeches.

 

Opples

http://www.wildmanstevebrill.com/JPEG'S/Plant%20Web%20Images/Crabapple.Ripe.jpg

>.> i know it says crabapples

 

Gandalf wins

But apparently all old wizards are gay so...they both win, we lose

madeyemoody