Voldemort was obsessed with being the best. I doubt he would pick some shitty half-ass ritual to produce a body. He tried for option number one, an immortal body with the stone. I doubt number two was dirt and hope. Granted, he may have just used it because it bypassed his mother's protection. I do wonder if the protection works for him as it does harry though. Would it reflect a killing curse?

 

I always thought Harry's supreme magically protected blood that burnt him to a crisp in the 1st book should of just straight up melted the new Voldemort from the inside. Same with the Horcrux in his head. It's always seemed pretty contradictory to me.

I doubt it would reflect a killing curse. Seems like the only effect and purpose was to negate Harry's personal protection (which ironically kind of ended up killing him anyways.)

 

Well, a cornered animal is dangerous. I think Dumbledore meant more dangerous because he was insane.

"The Old Earth, full of muggle filth, is no longer worthy a home for true wizards. We shall destroy it and my servants shall follow me when I fly to the Moon. On Brooms!"

Doesn't make even a modicum of sense, but he still plans to blow up the planet. Unpredictable too.

Voldemort obviously retained some of his famed intelligence, since he didn't take over the ministry outright in book 7. You woudn't expect that from a madman.
He also retained his speaking talent, since both his speech at the battle of Hogwarts and his speech upon his ressurection sounded appropriately Lordy.

But, he also has a temper Problem. And Harry flips his switch. So, all cunning goes out of the window when his precious Worldview is threathened by Harrys survival against all odds.
(Overcomplicated plans - This is a Story)

As for "Voldemort woudn't pick a ritual that leaves anything valuable out", its Voldemort. His priorities are kinda screwed up.

 

He went for a stone that would grant him immortality. That doesn't seem 'kinda screwed up' to me. It sounds like a good plan. What changed from book 1 to book 4 that would make his priorities screwed up.

 

Word of God says Voldemort never felt love or friendshio towards others, or woudn't value them. So, when he constructed a new self, he would leave out what he does not value.

Immortality might not be screwed up, Immortality because he is entitled isn't. (scene were Dumbledore went to the Orphanage and told Riddle about Magic.
"If she were a witch, she woudn't have died." Somewhere along the line being special became "deserves to live forever")
To seek a future full of glory for purebloods might not be screwed up, KILL ALL THE MUGGLES sure is.
And letting a giant Monster that would kill everyone and anyone that looks at it lose inside your home, because it will (probably) kill some guy you dislike ...

 

Dumbledore said it made him more dangerous, not more competent. A one-man-army tier murderous Dark wizard becoming more unstable, unpredictable, and irrational is most certainly them becoming more dangerous.

Or it was a Hoemonculus made of snake venom and probably a few other things, which is the simpler and more likely explaination.

 

Well, we've seen Voldemort do possession...a lot. Was there ever any kind of Homunculus in Harry Potter? The only time I think I've ever seen the word mentioned in relation to HP was a spell the Marauders supposedly used in the making of their map, and that was from Pottermore.

EDIT: Interestingly enough, one of the definitions of homunculus is "the human fetus," so it may not have to mean some weird sort of alchemical test-tube baby.

 

What the hell- Did I just go to a parallel universe?!

You make me think we've read different books. Vodemort definitely didn't convince himself he was a pureblood. He went after Harry because he was a half-blood like himself and so considered him his equal. The body is never stated to be made out of snake venom, but he did drink Nagini's venom.

What the... I don't even know whose arse you pulled that quote out of. Blow up the planet? What...

Homunculus inside of Harry? Seriously.

Where are these ideas coming from!?



_________________

Voldemort did go insane after his resurrection. He wasn't really insane before it, perhaps emotionless but not insane. It explains how he failed so badly with regards to Harry so many times. He just gets tunnel-vision and starts thinking "DIE HARRY POTTER I WILL KILL YOU HARRY POTTER REVENGE SHALL BE MINE". Actually, I think he's just weird/insane/irrational when it comes to Harry. He seems to be pretty 'normal' otherwise.

I can't think of anything that doesn't involve Harry that suggests he was insane after his resurrection (any more than he was prior to his first downfall).


Okay, with the last quote, I did realise that it was referring to the books.. eventually.

 

Homunculus in Harry Potter...as a series of novels with the title Harry Potter. Read more carefully and it won't seem so strange.

 

I did realise, it's in the small print It was too funny to not include with the other quotes.

We talked about how many people Voldemort could take on earlier. I noticed this little paragraph in the Deathly Hallows

Yeah. They. just. stood. there. watching.

 

Pfft! That old trick... :awesome

Uh, how many methods do you have for procuring a new body and transmigrating your soul/consciousness into it?

Voldemort wasn't looking for a cupcake recipe on the internet; I doubt he really had all that many choices. It's probably more of a "You'll take what you can get, and be glad you even got that much." situation, rather than, "I don't like these. Could I see what you have in the back room?"

Death/lingering in an incorporeal state, or life 'with side effects'. For Riddle, the choice was never in question.

 

It's also interesting to consider how much of Voldemort's 'insanity' or sociopathy is intentional. He felt love to be not only useless, but a critical weakness. In making his decisions to create Horcruxes or create new physical forms for himself, he may have shunned or scoffed at the thought of any instability or amoral quality being a side-effect, either because he believed he was good enough at magic to avoid them, or because he never considered a departure from the standard morality of the vermin he considered beneath himself to be a bad thing in the first place. He likely embraced what those around him felt to be frightful insanity or cruelty, just to show that such things made no difference to someone on his level, and to empower himself with the fears and ethical limitations of others, which he either never understood or never wanted to understand, simply because they are limitations.

 

Perspicacity, that was a pretty fucking great defense, but I think I can challenge it.

As for the jock thing. I interpret "jock" to mean someone who cares about sports more than academics. Martin Amis plays tennis, but he's not a jock. Harry, especially in the first three books, cares more about sport than academics. And there's nothing wrong with that. It's pretty clear from the books that Harry is very close to a Krum-level talent. He certainly could have gone pro. But this is a question of magical power. And magical power seems to be directly related to brain power. Voldemort and Dumbledore are both the two most powerful wizards in the books and the two most intelligent. This is not coincidental. I know I just begged the question, but do you honestly think Harry could beat either of them in a formal duel?

In both the graveyard and the flight from Privet Drivet, Harry was saved by the freak brother wand effect. He did not (consciously or subconsciously) invoke the effect. They don't count. And that deeper knowledge Harry has, where did he get if from and when did he explicitly use it? Harry's victory over Riddle (if you can even call it that) has more to do with Dumbledore's genius than any effort on Harry's part. And keep in mind, Harry was killed by Voldemort before he came back from the dead. So they're even on that score.

I grant Voldemort holds the idiot ball a lot. But he is clearly described as a genius, even if he doesn't behave like one. Also, ripping his soul to shreds clearly decreased his sanity. So he may behave incoherently rather than idiotically. There’s a big difference between insanity and stupidity. You could argue that his hubristic quest for immortality proves he is dumb. But he was exploring virgin territory. No one had ever created so many Horcruxes before. He is no more to blame for the side effects of his experiments than Marie Curie is for hers. He took a risk. It dove him mad. This doesn't make him stupid. For these reasons I think Voldemort can be said to be more intelligent than Harry and thus, at least in my view of magic, more powerful.

Ok.
I'm not sure what the allegiance rule is, but it seems to be pretty random. Snape was disarmed by Harry, Ron, and Hermione in book three. He didn't lose his wand's allegiance then.

I grant you that one. That was pretty cool. Also, he has a badass Patronus.

This was a freak edge case. How many brother wands are there in the world? And as you said, Harry’s wand invoked priori incantatem. Harry himself had very little to do with it.

Again, his wand seems to be doing an awful lot of the work here.

Yes, that was clever. But none of this has anything to do with power or ability. Harry made a clever and accurate inference, something Hermione does far more often and Dumbledore far more still.

Anyone with the Elder Wand could have done so. Its whole purpose is to amplify spells. Yes, if Harry is allowed to take a machine gun to a musket fight he will have an advantage. Even with the Elder wand, I bet Snape could still kick his ass in a formal duel.

You’ve created a special class of magic, which you call wandlore, that just so happens to support your hypothesis that Harry is a prodigy. I don’t buy it. Harry was not a prodigy in any class of magic, save for maybe DAtDA. And even there I don't think he's as much of a prodigy in that subject as Snape was at the same age, let alone Riddle and Albus.

 

Harry was not a Prodigy in anything. Except

DaDA
Flying
Patronus
Bravery

He faced down lifethreathening threaths all the time from age 11. While taunting them.

 

You're confusing Harry Potter with Harry Dresden.

 

Uh, he taunted at least Riddle in the Chamber. And jumped on the back of a freaking troll.
Sure, taunting isn't JKRs style, but Harry Potter wasn't quivering in terror when suddenly confronted with a deadly obstacle at a young age.
Which would be the natural reaction.

 

Didn't Harry call Tom out as a half-blood in front of his DEs at some point? Counts as pretty bad-ass taunting in my book.

 

I don't count his Patronus as Prodigious. I really hate that JKR had a whole bunch of other kids learn how to do it in later books. It really cheapened the only spell outside of the disarming charm that Harry was really good at.

I always love fics that have Harry as a better flyer than Krum even though that's pretty unlikely.

 

I hate it when people simplify magic into being only about dueling, or dueling being only about magic. There's a lot more to life and magic than just fighting.

I think Harry has the potential to become good enough duelist to beat just about anyone, at least in a no-gloves, dirty street fight. Harry just has the right qualities in being fast on his feet, having quick reflexes and instincts, and being able to actually fight and not freeze. Could Harry ever outsmart Dumbledore in a academic debate or learn more about esoteric ways of achieving immortality than Voldemort? No, of course not. That's not who Harry is. But does he have the potential to beat them in fight? Yes, I think so. Harry becoming the head of aurors also points towards this. He definitely wouldn't get that position for his administrative skills...

I also don't buy the "magical power = brainpower" point of view. There's more than enough evidence in canon to suggest that there is such thing as innate "power level". But as with anything else it takes practice to become good in magic, and smart people just happen to be more likely to put in the effort. It's when you combine smart with innately powerful when you get the one in a million Dumbledore.

 

Hmm regardless of Harry's position as head of Aurors, I still think Voldemort or Dumbledore would hand his arse down to him in a formal duel. I see Harry being more on the level of Shacklebolt or Moody, but LV/AD are in a class of their own, a category occupied by only one other - Gellert Grindelwald.