Maybe it doesn't do anything. I think Harry was right in deciding not to keep it: all it does is make it's user a target. Maybe it makes spells more powerful, maybe it's more "intimately bonded" with the wizard and/or the wizard's magic, maybe it's just a symbol of what you've achieved -- but it's not really worth a life when it so easily takes others just by its existence. It's possible that that's it's ability: it warps the perception of wizards and witches into believing that the wand is something worth dying/killing for.

 

Possible, but I doubt it. The elder wand would have to have some form of tangible use, or else no one would go through the hassle of defeating/killing somebody for the prestige you would get until someone kills you. More likely, as previously stated it causes your spells to be casted more efficiently and bonds better with you magical core. Thus, in order for it to transfer ownership that bond must be severed. Given that wands are said to be semi-sentient, this could also make the wands parasitic. Which could be their true power, a second magical pool upon which to draw extra power from. Thus, Grindelwald and DD could be magically equal (power level) but with DD ingenuity he could still defeat the (accumulated) more powerful Grindalwald.

 

This is just my theory on the whole Grindlewald/Dumbledore thing.

Is it possible for a wand to pass ownership by simply literally passing it on. What if, instead of Dumbledore and grindlewald actually dueling, they had simply met up and Dumbledore coerced Grindlewald to give him the wand? I can't find any mention in the books of a "spectacular duel" or "a great display of magical power" concerning one dueling the other. So thats my theory...

 

True, but Grindel disappears afterward. No one ever hears from him again, true he could have went into hiding but given that he is considered magically powerful and ambitious to be a dark figure of some form, hoping to reform the world I do not believe that no matter how good at screwing dumble is, that ambition would be put aside. We've seen how incomptent the magical world is, people like voldemort and grindelwald can take over quite easily. There's no way if he was ambitious enough to try to revolutionize the world he would just decide to stop because dumbledore asked him to. And it says he 'defeated' grindelwald (foreshadowing for the elder wand or stupid mistake...) so unless he has an amazing ability to control the press-which he doesn't- someone must have seen him defeated. He only became great after his victory (this is an assumption) so they wouldn't have taken him at face value at the time.

 

Incorrect; Voldemort visited Grindelwald's prison, and, if I remember correctly, killed him, during his search for the Elder Wand.

 

Ops slipped my mind. Yeah he did i checked the wikipedia (though that site is not infallible it is normally correct..).

Either way we are off topic now.

 

The wand obviously has some power as it has been witnessed in the book (i.e Harry repairing his former wand when Hermione's wand couldn't). So as to power I think it is safe to assume that the wand grants some sort of extra power whether it be a boost in magical strength or an ability to make your spells the best they possibly can ( a theory which I tend to agree with).

The only issue it why would such powerful people go looking for the wand if all it does is make spells the best they can be, when they are probably powerful and wise enough to do it on there own.

Thus I think the magic of the wand is most likely to grant extra magical strength. Though we will probably never know since JK never explained how magic truly works in her universe.

On a side note its been killing me: How did Gridelwald become master of the Elder Wand when all he did is steal it from Gregoravitch (sp)? He didn't challenge him or anything, and we know stealing is not enough because Voldemort tried stealing it from Dumbledore's tomb and it didn't work.

 

I think it's because; A) It makes the plot work or B) Grindel 'defeated' the security set up by it's previous owner, and thus defeating him. I'm inclined to agree with the first...

 

The reason why Voldemort stealing the wand from Dumbledore's tomb was that Dumbledore was no longer the Master of the Elder Wand: Draco Malfoy was.

JKR said that the Elder Wand has no loyalty - it switches allegiance to the most powerful wizard it can find. Thus when it's previous owner is defeated, it immediately and completely switches allegiance to the victor, whereas a normal wand has varying amounts of loyalty to it's first owner, such that even after a defeat it will not switch allegiance as much as the Elder Wand does. All this is down to the semi-sentient nature of wands - different wands have different "personalities" and some are more loyal than others. The Elder Wand is the ultimate disloyal wand.

So when Grindelwald stole the wand it recognised him as the more powerful of the two wizards and switched allegiance to him.

The reason why Harry is the ultimate master of the wand is that (in JKR's view, and thus in her story) the power to embrace death rather than run from it is the greatest power a person can have, and thus the wand doesn't switch allegiance from Harry to Voldemort, even though Voldemort is the more conventionally powerful wizard, because it recognises this power in Harry that Voldemort doesn't see.

 

ah thank you for the clarification, now excuse me while I go throw up after hearing that. I think I preferred not knowing why. At least then I could hope it was something I missed when I read the book rather than JK gay concept.

 

Several. It was massive, could be polished easily, and was very firm to the touch. Most elder wands are said to be gnarled and droopy.

 

Sounds familiar.

Do I know you?

 

Your wit astounds me. I've never before even considered that the word "wand" could be used to imply "penis".

 

DRACO was more powerful than Dumbledore? HOW did it make THAT assessment? The list of people who contributed to Dumbledore's "defeat" is lengthy -
Riddle,
Regulus (who reset the trap that lured AD into drinking poison, instead of destroying the entire setup)
Harry (who kept feeding the poison even though Albus begged him to stop,)
Albus himself, who pressured Harry into vowing to obey the order that ended up helping to kill him, and who prevented Harry from trying to interfere at the Tower,
Snape (who had failed to stop the damage caused by the ring,) and who actually cast the killing spell
... I remember being confused at the time - now that I've thought about it, it makes LESS sense than ever.
WTF? Please, someone, explain this?


For that matter, Phoenix tears are sovereign against all poisons - where was Fawkes? And why didn't Snape carry Phoenix tears in his pocket?

 

It was Malfoy that disarmed him, and it was Malfoy that came up with the plan that led to his death.

 

All of the firm belief that the wizarding world was lazy.
Too easy of an answer for the problem, it was overlooked it seems like.

 

I don't think the potion was really a poison; more like a hallucinogenic agent that would LEAD any other drinker to kill themselves. Pheonix tears have only been shown to heal poisons, whereas whatever was killing Dumbledore was the result of the slow-acting curse on the ring horcrux.

Really? I had you pegged for a pretty smart bloke. Oh well

 

Blaise, that was sarcasm.

Draco wasn't more powerful then Dumbledore, but at the same time grindelwald probably wasn't stronger then the person he stole it from and yet he got possession. If Draco and Dumbledore were the only people it could sense, and Draco had taken the wand from Dumbledore it would see him as more powerful, since he TOOK the wand, it was not given to him. The way the wand sees it, how could a weaker wizard take it from a stronger one unless it was more POWERFUL. And the wand goes with the most powerful wizard it can find, not necessarily the strongest.

 

Why the hell didn't AD make a point of getting the wand to Harry, then?

 

Because he couldn't give the wand to Harry, and if he fought less then 100% or told Harry to suprise attack him, it would have counted as the same thing. Whereas (as far as we know) Dumbledore didn't know Draco was after him/going to suprise attack and and thus wand transferrence took over. Also, Harry is the master of the Hollows because he doesn't want them, like at all. If Dumbledore gave him the wand, and he took it that would mean some part of him still wanted it.