I was thinking about this the other day. Its widely used in a lot of fiction as a superior alternative to shields. The question is is it realistic? All we know is that spells are slower than bullets and that their bright so youd notice one flying your way.

Now to the point could you for example dodge someting as slow as a thrown snowball? Think about it is it really possible.

On the other hand getting a shield up in time might be just as impossible when the caster is too near.

 

If there is enough time for a shield to be raised then there is enough time for the person to step aside. This is assuming that the spell isn't tracking the person nor dose it affect a large area.

 

In OOTP duel between Voldemort and Dumbledore, there was only one dodge - when Dumbledore sidestepped AK, actually. All other curses were blocked in one way or the other. The same can be said for the duel(s) in DOM - curses were either blocked or they missed the target completely. We haven't seen any wizards hopping and tumbling like Jackie Chain, dodging bullets.

So yeah, magical dueling is a gentleman's sport and not something where you're supposed to dance around like a clown.

 

Well, in my opinion Lucius Malfoy and Bellatrix Lestrange gave up the Gentleman's Sport argument when they threw potentially fatal curses at teenagers, but hey.

Personally, I think it's because most wizards/witches are out of shape. I mean sure, they could play Quidditch, if you want to assume that sitting on a broom and occasionally squatting low gives a toned fit body. I mean, we pretty much see that they have ancient runes, DADA, Transfiguration, but they really don't have any sort of physical education class at all, probably because purebloods see all physical labor as very muggle.

In short, they're pretty much couch potatoes, especially when they get an all you can eat buffet every night. Which is why they never dodge, probably because they simply don't have the stamina to cost and move around quickly at the same time.

 

I disagree with the whole Dodging idea, not on the fact that dueling is a "Gentleman's" sport, but entirely on the speed at which the spells are cast. Like IP said, during Dumbledore & Voldemort's brief duel in OOTP there is basically no dodging (and no, the rapid-fire disapparation doesn't count). I don't think it's actually plausible to be dodging spell-fire.

As we see in the movies (which some don't consider canon, though with JKR's involvement they technically are) spells travel incredibly fast, sure you may be able to see the spell travel, but keep in mind the distance travelled is never more than a couple of metres. In the dueling club during COS, the shrieking shack in POA and the third tast in GOF (not to mention the stunners during the World Cup scene), we can see how fast those spells travel - sure it may be slower than a bullet, but can you really see someone dodging something like that? A prime example is when Harry hits Snape with Expelliarmus during POA, it was hardly a shock to Snape when Harry pointed the wand at him but still he was caught off guard with the spell. There was absolutely NO way he could have dodged that, AND he was at the opposite end of the room.

 

There is nothing to say that with sufficient control of the mind a wizard cannot make minor adjustments to the course of a spell. There is also nothing to indicate that with appropriate skill a shield uses up particularly much energy. It can be as simple as summoning a small stone. Dodging requires you to split your concentration between physical movement and magical activity, which for all we know could have an adverse effect on the power levels of your spells.

I can see the pro's on being able to dodge, in the case of the Killing Curse its necessary. But, I think there is a reason that shield spells exist. That reason probably amounts to the equation magic > non magic. No equal to, no lesser than, but always greater than. Its not that wizards disdain dodging as a muggle thing. Its simply that why exert effort and split your concentration, when there is a spell that does it for you.

Now, you could argue that thats just lazy, if you look at a magical duel in context. Two reasonably similar opponents, a duel could last for hours at a time. Its not like a muggle fight, where if you get hurt you stay hurt. If you get hit by a spell, you can cancel the effects. You can heal yourself. So, so long as you avoid getting hit by complete incapacitation spells, you can continue to fight and heal yourself.

As IP said, its a gentlemans sport, and even in serious combat its generally viewed as such. Again, you might argue that that means fuck all from the point of view of muggle borns. But perhaps you underestimate the pressure exterted on them to fit in. Perhaps they pick and choose which battles to fight so to speak.

 

I agree with Avitus, that the spells are just too fast to dodge them. IMO you can jump aside, but while you lie on the floor, your opponent has more then enough time to hit you with another spell.

 

On the Jackie Chain vibe. It could be possible to dodge without losing concentration, but only if its a pre-trained reflex like in many marshal arts. But then it'll be the first response and anything else would be distracting than because it would require conscious effort. But alas sure there are spells with a wide scope (even if they have minor effects) that can be rather distracting.

Ps: On another (maybe) connected note has anyone before discussed Auror Rules of Engagement. It would be purely speculative (like most magics in HP) but still any ideas. Would they dodge or shield or would that be on preferense? Do they apparate innto battle standing or would they crouch like muggle special forces? Anithing on equippment as there could be more imaginative things than dragonhide armour (wich is fannon if understand it correctly).

PsPs: spellcheck is streiking

 

I think dodging is more connected to the strength of the wizard you're facing. Voldemort, for example, probably hurls curses that are not only fast and deadly, but possibly have a sort of 'splash' damage effect. Say he hurls a curse, Random Auror #1 jumps out of the way, congratulates himself, and then is blown to pieces by the exploding behind him.

 

There is no reason for Wizards to be learning Martial Arts... that's why they have magic. Any Wizard's first response should be to shield when entering a battle, not jump willy-nilly through the area. In this case spells can be equated to bullets... if someone is firing gun at you, you don't jump to the side... they'll just keep firing at your new position. It's stupid.

Auror Rules of Engagement would be an interesting thing to work out, again though, they wouldn't dodge anything, nor would they crouch, I would suspect wand-work is severely limited when you jump to the ground giving yourself limited space to cast shields and curses.

PS: Your second post-script should read "PPS" (post-post script), not "PsPs".

 

I didnt mean crouching per say more like the SWAT half crouch thing. Anyway 10 minutes later thinking about the superiority of magics I remembered disillusionment.

 

I think it's going to depend on the level of the duel. School kid duels are probably okay for dodging. I doubt they are going to be lightning fast curse tossers. On the other hand in a high class duel with professionals one would think shields are superior. Whats going to take more time, a quick casual silent flick of your wand thats probably already subconciously ingrained into your head, or leaping to the side?

It would probably be a good idea to be in atleast decent shape so if the situation called for it you get get the hell out quickly without physical activity severely impairing you, but other than that I would find in high level duels magic and shields are far superior.

 

The former might not be possible when your own wand is already busy forming the next offensive spell.

In the end it probably comes down to combination of all the options, block or deflect spells with shields, evade those that break through and generally present as small a target as possible.

Shields and counterspells take time away from your own offence and you only have one wand to cast either. So if you can twist out of the way of an incoming one it means your wand is free to send curses at the other bastard.

 

Exactly. It all comes down to a combination of variable which are ever-changing and impossible to predict. I think really that shielding is used because it blocks most every spell, which cuts down on possible effects dodging can't remove.

 

The caster's strength and perhaps skill level could also factor into the equation. In the end, shields are probably the best option.

 

If you don't move before the spell is cast I think you're going to get hit. But if you move half way through their spell I think you could dodge. It's not like you're going to sit there and watch them cast the spell, waiting for the last moment to move.

 

I agree with the fact that the more powerful you get, the faster your spells - but if a near 200 year old man can nimbly dodge an Avada Kedavra from the most powerful dark wizard alive, to be sure a boy/man in prime health can dodge it.

Another thing that most of you have neglected to mention are the amount of time it takes for you to cast a spell. If you say "Avada Kedavra" (which, if the movies are taking in to consideration, is very long and drawn out) you can tell where the spell is going before it ever moves from wandpoint. It would be considerably more difficult with silent spell casting, but the wand is still pointed at you.

For example, Wingardium Leviosa (pardon spelling if it's incorrect) takes a "swish and flick" in the first movie, and presumably most spells need wand movements as well, even if they are silent. So you have a 1 or 2 second interval in which you can dodge/dive/duck/dodge before the magic ever takes place.

Of course, if you never saw the spell coming until you caught a glimpse of the light, or you were attacked from behind, it would be near impossible to dive.

As for shields, I can imagine powerful and accomplished duelists like Dumbledore, Moody or Flitwick could draw up a shield in the blink of an eye, thus negating the speed of even the quickest spell. As for Harry, he probably needs enough time to say Protego! to be properly defended, therefore, he would need to keep moving and throwing spells to defeat a good wizard.

As for Auror Rules of Engagement, it depends on whether it's war-time or not. I imagine during years of peace, if there is some type of scuffle, it's shield yourself long enough to determine reasons/inspiration for this fight and then try to diffuse the situation using non-lethal force. But if a minister admits there is a Dark Lord around, come into the battle ready to do everything you can to survive/defeat your opponent, definitely using lethal force.

Also, Aurors are probably meant to work in teams to finish off their opponents, therefore, a dive or dodge could put you in the crossfire of your allies or throw off their aim. So shielding both yourself and others would be the rule.

Hope I gave some insight there... or at least sounded like I knew what I was talking about.

 

Point taken, however, i doubt that will often be the case. In a duel someone has to be on defensive and one on ofensive most the time. I would assume it to be a game of sorts, one tosses a spell, one blocks, and it keeps going so on and the roles reversing until one finally come out the victor. The chances that both opponents are casting offensive spellwork at the same time is unlikely unless they have already pre-aranged some form of shield or shelter to get the rapid move off out of turn, which i also assume would happen often while trying to get the upper hand, however, that would be a pre-aranged case.

Unless it's a very small sidestep i doubt it would be any more efficent to move out of the way. When you think about it the second it takes to "twist" away is all it takes the opponent to send off another spell. So i guess your ass better twist again. And any very fast leaps or twists and turns is most likely going to screw up wand movements or concentration. So dodging spells in order to get the upper hand by not having to spend the time shielding isn't going to work well unless it's a very small sidestep that's not causing much disruption to your wand movements. Most likely only going to happen in very long ranged fights, or with someone very expert, calm and collected. In that case though i would assume to to be a very good move.

And if we are to asssume that the spells are flying as fast as they do in cannon movies, i sincerely doubt your going to dodge and spell thats already made it past or broken your shield. At that point your probably screwed, seeing as were talking about barely having time to get a shield up to begin with from an apponent most likely 10-30 feet away.

So in a way of speaking we're going to agree, a combination of all methods in the correct places is going to be superior technique, i just would find the way i invision battles at least 90% of blocking is magical based (shields, apparating, transfiguration, ect.)

 

Well, when you throw all that in, combat can change significantly. A skilled apparator could be all over the place at once, which would be on the extreme end of dodging, whereas as far as I can tell, Transfiguration requires no sound and next to no wand movements, so you could be blocking, attacking, and incapacitating all at once.