This is probably a rhetorical question of some sort, but why the fuck did Darth Marrs write such a fucking bleak and depressing world into existence in his "Firebird" stories?

I've just burned through the first and second one in a matter of two days and what Warlocke revealed with the spoiler wasn't even the worst of it.

It just keeps getting worse and I find myself wondering why I'm even persisting with reading this. Morbid curiosity, most likely.

That said, this fic does have some rather interesting stuff, like all the inherent biological differences between magical and mundane folk, which did remind me and made me want to reread the official books to look up something, but then I figured I might as well ask this here.

Has there ever been a decent theory, since there's no official word from Rowling on the matter, on how magic exactly came to be bestowed upon humans?

 

How was gravity 'bestowed' upon the universe? That wizards and other magical creatures were given magic in the first place rather than it (or the ability to interact with it, however the connection between them waving their wands around and the effect resulting actually happens) being as intrinsic to them as the matter that makes up their bodies is a pretty big assumption.

Magic to me seems a force that's part of the universe in HP as much as any other. Just one muggles have no understanding or experience of, but wizards do because they can interact with it, they can use it, they can perform it.

Wizards can use magic because they're wizards, just like you can punch someone in the face because you're human.

 

If we assume that her changes are complete and not just skin deep then I'd say that you appear as what she looked like when you got her hair.

 

This would allow so much abuse. I like it.

Imagine her changing into (for example) Fleur.

You then cut all of her hair, she regrows them right back. You cut them again and she keeps regrowing them.

Infinite supply of "Fleur's" hair.

 

It's not just hair (the one on your head, I presume) that works as an ingredient for Polyjuice, as far as I can recall. Just thought to point this out.

 

Maybe magic is modular.

Any wizard who is powerful enough can simply switch out magical cores with another wizard once they're burned out or too tired.

I mean, it takes a lot of energy to create something through magic.

 

Ever get a hair in your food?

How about a toenail?

Even if you haven't, can you imagine the level of disgust you would feel for either and come up with one that is clearly the worse option?

That's how I feel every time I mentally remind myself that Polyjuice can theoretically use any part of the "donor's" body. For my money, they can stick with using hair. I don't bite my own nails, and I definitely don't want to consume those of anyone else.

 

The main reason I've stuck with it is that he's said a bunch of times that book three is about Harry fighting back, and successfully making some changes.

 

And how many people get killed in the process? Or how many rape/torture scenes do we have to read through before it gets somewhat better? I'm honestly not sure if I'll try sticking with the third story, even this one I'm sort of queasy with reading about. Just reading that about Luna's 'healing' was sufficiently disturbing.

I mean, there's obviously some fantastic stuff, great potential here, but then again, there's so much grimdark for the sake of grimdark. Now, I'm a great fan of 40k, love it quite a lot and have for the past six or seven years, and that is filled with over the top grimdark, of which the most benign is, naturally, feeding at least a thousand psykers to a near-god-corpse perched on a golden throne so that the rest of humanity doesn't get gobbled up by entities of vast malevolence and power. But I expect that kind of shit from 40k, it's par for the course.

I suppose it resonates a tad wrong for me to read so much awful stuff happening in Harry Potter.

Beard hair can probably do wonders as well, makes you wonder how no one ever managed to impersonate Dumbledore. I just imagine him going down a hallway, a single hair decides on its own to secede and whoosh before it even gets to land, it's captured and put into captivity in a jar where all of its brethren dwell for many years now.

 

If I'm too pussy to put up my very first fanfic ever on his forum, can I ask for someone to more or less beta it?

 

What would be a reasonable date for the creation of the Deathly Hallows? I always imagined it to be before the founding of Hogwarts so...sometime between 500-1000 AD?

 

I thought I saw a family tree that dated the Peverells and therefore the Hallows a few years after the death of Slytherin.
I don't have a copy of Deathly Hallows with me but doesn't Hermione read Ignotis' death year of the grave on Christmas eve?
According to HP wiki Hogwarts was founded in 990 AD and Antioc was born in 1214 he was the eldest brother.

 

I'd always thought the Peverells were pre-Hogwarts. The Wikia mentions this bit:

If he were their ancestor or descendant, it wouldn't bother me too much- I like to think that wizards got involved up until the Statutes of Secrecy became a thing. I don't want every famous person to be a secret spell-slinger, but the occasional adviser, sub-commander or spymaster fits my sense of wizarding history.

The dates used by the Wikia are drawn from a 2010 release called Harry Potter Film Wizardry, which is derived from cast and crew notes. Its canonicity is dubious, but I wouldn't be surprised if their supplementary 'facts' ended up repeated on Pottermore eventually.

 

Ah...right, the wikia does say 1200 for the 3 brothers. But just from reading the story itself, I got the sense that the three brothers were from an era where trained magic capable of crossing a river was quite rare...hence pre-Hogwarts.

 

So Slytherin came before the Peverells then? Are they a separate line that intermarried with Slytherin's family, or are all of them direct descendants? I thought Slytherin was a Peverell descendant based on Potters being descended from one of the brothers (unless that's fanon). Slytherin intermarriage sounds more likely, but then all the Peverells could still be Slytherin descendants? Since the Gaunts had the ring with the "Peverell coat of arms" the only real way this could work would be that a Slytherin woman marries one of the Peverell brothers and gives rise to Voldemort's line. This is assuming that Parseltongue arose early in the Slytherin line.

Still, I have the feeling that it's been confirmed somewhere that the Peverells came first. Can anyone help me dig up a source?

 

I think that both families simply existed in the same time period and then at one point intermarried.

 

In my headcanon, when Hermione said that Hogwarts was founded "more than a thousand years ago", she meant a LOT more.

I'm personally placing the founding of Hogwarts around:

385 – Merlin is born.

393 – Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is founded.

396 – Merlin begins his education at Hogwarts and is sorted to Slytherin.

410 – The Romans depart from Britannia.

471 – Arthur I becomes king.

 

Was there any particular reason why Tom Marvolo Riddle's eyes had a red glint to them? I remember rereading that bit in HBP, where he goes to Hogwarts for the interview about the DADA post when Dumbledore is Headmaster. The following bits from the interview come to mind: "...and his eyes seemed to burn red..." as well as "...he saw Voldemort’s eyes flash red again and the slitlike nostrils flare..."

We also know that in the books, when Voldemort was resurrected, he had acquired cat-like slitted eyes ("Whiter than a skull, with wide, livid scarlet eyes..."), so in GoF it could be attributed to the ritual. I don't quite understand what had them shift from their natural color before that though.

I've read in some fanfics how it happened due to constant use of dark magic, but were that the case, Bellatrix Lestrange, among others, would have had her eye-color changed as well. In other fics, the color change is attributed to the creation of his Horcruxes or simpy the constant use of dark magic rituals as a way to enhance himself.

 

I think it has something to do with Horcruxes. The only other time I can recall the red glint being mentioned before the resurrection is when he's speaking to Hepzibah Smith.

It's usually mentioned in relation to some sort of greed, or perhaps lust (for power, that is).

 

That number is based off the throwaway line of "Hogwarts being founded 1000 years ago" or something like that during Harry's first or second year. But in reality, I really, really doubt that it was exactly 1000 years when that was said. It could be 1200 years ago, or 900 years.