Would it work or would dragon fire be too strong for the charm to repel?

 

It depends on whether you think there's such a thing as power scaling. Some people think that shield charms can block nearly everything with minimal effort, or that 'diffindo' can sever heads. Those people probably think that the flame-freezing charm will work on anything from a candle flame to walking on the sun.

Personally, I think the usage/tactics of the spell is key, rather that brute force. Standing in front of a dragon and trying to just stop the flame head on will never work. Otherwise, it really wouldn't take a team of 10 dragon keepers to handle them. So while I think the main brunt of the dragon breathe cannot really be overwhelmed, perhaps the fringes can, and the collateral, or even perhaps working for just a second before collapsing. Whether or not it has to do with temperature, or a modal thing of magical vs nonmagical fire, that's a different topic I guess.

 

Dragonfire might be Magical in and of itself. So, might not work as well.

 

Well, let's start from the extreme and work backwards.

We can correctly assume that it would be useless against fiendfyre.

So what about a fire whip or the torrent of fire Dumbledore can conjure?

We know non-magical fire can be stopped, since the witch burnings mention this spell frequently.

If all magical fire can ignore the charm, then that includes spells, dragon fire, veela fireballs, etc.

 

The main reason it takes a number of wizards to control a dragon is that their hide is magic-resistant. So that's not a particularly good argument. As others say, I think it comes down to whether dragon fire is magical fire or regular fire that is magically produced. If it's regular fire, I see no reason why that charm couldn't stop it. Even if you say that temperature is a magically relevant factor, that just means you have to cast the charm better.

 

There's as least one instance which tentatively points to dragon's breath being magical in nature. Hagrid makes use of the several enchantments on Sirius' bike during the Battle of Seven Potters. One of them is explicitly and repeatedly referred to as dragon-fire being expelled from the exhaust pipe. If the fire can be distinguished from regular flames in some way other than its colour (since regular flames come in different hues anyway) then it's likely a magical property.

 

There's also the fact that none of the Triwizard Tournament competitors decided to use it. It's not conclusive evidence, but there is the implication that it wouldn't work. Nobody likes being burnt to a crisp, after all.

 

Without a doubt.

I suspect it was Fiendfyre, actually.

I am of the opinion that shield charms can be only broken with magic, so theoretically they could withstand nuclear explosions.

 

The idea that there's "magical fire" that is not fiendfyre and yet somehow different than regular fire is very old-school D&D. And not in a good sense. Next you have conjured animals ripping through shields, since magic will break them. And you'll try to epxlain how transfigured animals will possess some sort of magical aura to break shields as well, otherwise no one would ever use them in battle.

Far easier to simply use scaling magic, with enough force - magical or not - breaking any shield.

 

Who's to say they didn't? All four knew that they'd be facing dragons, and it's the sort of spell you apply before you're in a situation, if you can.

That's another throwaway line JKR might have had; Hermione saying, 'Well, I hope my flame-freezing charm keeps the worst of it away from you.'

(on the other hand, I could see an editor saying 'lose this stupid line- it takes the reader out of the mood of the moment')

 

If I remember correctly, Wendelin the Weird would cast the Flame-freezing Charm at the fire, not on herself. It seems to me that the charm makes the flames harmless instead of making a person fire-proof like is prevalent in fanon.

If so, I think it would be tricky to Flame-freeze dragon-fire, even if it is not innately magical, due the size of fire breath. You could succeed in freezing only half of the flames and be horrible burned by the other.

 

Uh, the HP series is full of different types of magical fire other than Fiendfyre.

Gubraithian fire is a magical fire that never goes out.

Blue-bell flame is a type of magical fire that can be held without harm but burns objects.

The Unbreakable Vow uses a form of magical fire to bind the participants.

Snape used two different forms of magical fire, purple and black flamed, that acted as selective barriers depending on what potion you had consumed.

Dumbledore cast a form of heatless fire on Tom Riddle's wardrobe at the orphanage.

Floo fire is capable of magical transport with other fireplaces.

Phoenix fire is capable of magical transport.

 

Two of those are optical effects of other spells or effects - Phoenix Fire and Floo Fire. Dumbledore's "Heatless flames" sounds like an illusion (the wiki mentions a possible combo of flame-freezing and incendio). And magical fire to bind people sounds like a magical effect that looks like fire, not real fire. I'll grant you the other fires mentione,d but it still doesn't mean a shield spell should protect against "Normal fire" more than against "magical fire". It opens a can of worms with regards to conjuration and transfiguration spells.

Having the flame-freezing charm affect fire, not people, would neatly avoid the question.

 

Yes, that's the entire point. Magical fire is not real fire, it's magical fire.

It doesn't, because transfigured and conjured objects are the real deal. They're not magical constructs, they're physical objects like any other.

 

Since Charlie has burn scars, I'm going to assume it doesn't protect completely.

 

Nope. Cedric got burnt pretty badly and Fleur had her robe set alight.

 

If you need magic to break a shield then both conjuration and transfiguration are almost useless in a duel against someone who can cast a shield. I do not think that's a good outcome.

 

Oh no, when movie Dumbledore drove back the Inferi? No, I think that was just a Bog Standard assload of fire.

---------- Post automerged at 05:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:29 PM ----------

You have a poor imagination.

 

I think this makes the most sense, though I have trouble picturing when she'd have the opportunity to wave her wand and cast the spell between being tied to a pyre and being burned.

 

Remember it is possible to cast through a wand you are not holding. It could just be somewhere on her person and as long as it was pointing is something approaching the right direction (which wouldn't be terribly hard since you'd want the handle facing 'up') it would work okay.