You're misunderstanding.

If two werewolves have a child while both human, the child is human. If a werewolf and a human have a child, the child is human. Only when two werewolves have a child together while both in wolf form does something special happen. The result is not a werewolf either, but a wolf, though with 'abnormally high intelligence' (in comparison to regular wolves presumably).

The pack released into the Forbidden Forest were not werewolves. They could never become human. They were smart wolves, animals. How intelligent were they? I doubt there were human intelligent. Think more Hedwig.

 

My first response would have been "no, You don't understand" but since I can't find the full text on my phone, I'll just ask for anyone to paste the rest on werewolves here.

The way I read it, though, was that A. "Werewolf + Normal = Normal"

B. "Metis exception."

C. "Other random stuff."

Was there even a line about werewolf + werewolf, without the special Metis circumstances?


My logic for W+W=W is from the need of a statement W+N=N - if all W+W ended up Normal, there would be no need to write about an exception. You'd just write - all werewolf children are born without a curse (it even encompasses the true cubs, which are kinda super-wolves and have no curse to speak off). Also, it seems stupid that Remus didn't know that. His fear had to had some basis in werewolf curse being hereditary. Unless he and Tonks went at it in wolf form*. That must have been one scary thing when he heard about the pregnancy.

And I never said that the Metis are in any way sentient. The statements were about different things. I thought the gap I left was a clue enough.


So yeah, I might have just written an ambiguous post. Not the first nor the last time I have caused confusion among the general populace.


As a sidenote, I expected more Muggle werewolves. Oh well, I was wrong in FFF.

*p.s. Tonks could change her face into a pig's snout. Could she change into a full pig? A wolf form to 'not waste the full moon weekend'?

p.p.s. For a maximum weirdness potential - what off wolf and werewolf children? If two weres on a full moon can give birth to a normal wolf...

 

I guess now it makes sense what was meant by Hagrid being "...found keeping werewolf cubs under his bed...".

 

Here's the full werewolf stuff from Pottermore. Pottermore's gone no copy so I had to transcribe it. Sorry for any mistakes. You can read the full thing here.

Nauro, even after reading it again, I really can't agree with your logic. You're reading something which is not there and trying add 'logic' into what is a fundamentally emotion reaction (Remus' fear for his child).

 

Wait, so does the werewolf walk around pregnant or is only the wolf form pregnant for nine months? How the hell would that shit work?

 

Even a normal werewolf pregnancy would be weird, with the mother changing at least eight times before birth.

Still, I can't imagine how fucked up must it have been for the first W+W full moon romance couple.

"You child, well... You had wolf puppies..."

And they are fucking wolves - even if intelligent ones. How the... I mean come on, and Dumbledore released them into the forest? Won't that mean that the parent's can't visit - I don't even know with that sort of premise. Sounds like a horror story with The Metamorphosis references.

And then they gave birth to wolves.

 

Agreed this is fucked up, but it's not game-breaking. I see a few scenarios growing from this.

Standard outcome: Folks get busy, at least one of which is a werewolf. Kids are born normal but the lycanthrope bites them soon after, anyway. Bites the partner for good measure.

The mythic version: Two werewolves under the influence of wolfsbane potion or some other charm are able to resist the usual urge to kill humans and instead get busy. The next morning, the male is back to normal but the woman is stuck as a near-wolf. Over the next several months she lives until her litter is viable, at which point she gives birth, nurses them for a bit and returns to being human. The two decide to date others.

The wordhammer/Cronenberg version: setup as above, but the woman wakes as normal. Each full moon she changes and her litter changes within her as well. After four or five months, the litter is born during a full moon. With the natural instincts of a mother, she nurses the things she bore despite them not smelling quite right, then gets killed by a stag (oh wait- wrong background).

tl;dr: I can work with this.

 

The whole thing would require the woman to be ovulating on the full moon. How many female werewolves are there that would actually be willing to go through with this? It's only known to have happened twice, so I guess the odds are pretty slim. But then again, anything is possible in fiction, especially fantasy.

The whole premise of this isn't well thought out at all. I've never really liked werewolves anyway, because to create a new werewolf a big vicious werewolf has to attack and not kill another human. That to me has always seemed like a terribly inefficient way to keep the... species? going. It's especially grating when it's explicitly pointed out that werewolves are mindless beasts going around acting all animalistic, which would likely make the death rate of bitten humans incredibly high.

 

"Willing to go through" is the key phrase. Who says anyone is willing in all of this? And she may just be unwilling to have an abortion, if it's even reasonably possible (I don't know, magic is involved here).

I agree it's pretty fucking stupid. It would be horrific to start giving birth to wolves, human or wolf-form.

I don't agree with applying logic to it. Phenotype and genotype are different things, so it's believable that werewolf + nonwerewolf = human. Even werewolf + werewolf = human makes sense to a degree. Magic is involved. JKR shoudl have just said that, it's so much easier, "Werewolves can give birth to humans, werewolves and wolves. It depends on the circumstances of the birth and the relationship, because, you know, magic." She basically says that, anyway, by acknowledging the existence of "rare exception" infant werewolves.

 

Where does she acknowledge that? Have I missed something?

 

I feel like it would be a situation (if two werewolves mated and the female got pregnant) where they both reverted and transformed as normal, but because the children were conceived under the full moon when both partners were werewolves, they would be born 36 weeks later under that full moon, so it would be a werewolf giving birth to wolves, not a human mother giving birth to wolves.

 

What I love about this:

13-year-olds on Pottermore are reading this stuff, scratching their heads much as we are and then talking about it with their friends, their siblings, their parents...

"Hey Mom, if two werewolves who kiss during the full moon have wolves for babies, what does the mother werewolf do when the moon isn't full?"

"What the Hell are you reading?!"

"Uhh... uhh... Twilight! Yeah."

 

So Harry Potter and teh Sparkly Hufflepuff is now canon?

 

EDIT: Nevermind, Ninja'd up the ass.

 

Still better than Werewolf: the Apocalypse. If I remember that right, Werewolves are only born, not turned. And there is a huge pressure not to have werewolf-werewolf relations and a definite knowledge that unless lots of werewolves are born that the world will end. So, by the rules you are encouraged to have as much unprotected sex with as many people as possible, and as many wolves as possible.

Yes, the popular RPG Werewolf: the Apocalypse is telling you that bestiality is a good thing and you should have sex with as many wolves as possible. Might I note that with WoD there is a lot of LARP going on as an excuse to have sex, so the rules and backstory encourage LARPing having sex with animals.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

 

If you think World of Darkness isn't deliberately a fucked up setting by design, then you don't know World of Darkness. Magic becoming common knowledge would cause the entire universe to explode in a quantum paradox. The werewolves are fighting a losing battle against Lovecraftian abominations. Vampires are the Illuminati and are only concerned with maintaining a status quo so they can continue to survive, and live in perpetual fear of the actions of the few titans in their midst, like Dracula and Cain. The Unseelie exist, and want to devour everything, and can only be delayed (not stopped) by those wretched and tormented scions of mortal and fey blood, the Changelings, who must live alone and die unmourned in a war they did not ask for against a parentage they can barely comprehend.

There is a reason it's called World of Darkness.

 

I must be the only one that thinks about Requiem, Awakening, and Forsaken when the World of Darkness is mentioned. Everybody always talks about the classic World of Darkness, but I prefer the newer, updated world.

In Forsaken, werewolves cannot reproduce with wolves.

 

OWoD is usually what people talk about because that was before they butchered the lore.

 

Personally, I was hoping they would explore the Animagus process a bit. Sure, we know it's dangerous and takes at least three years, but still: it would be nice.

I did like the Remus Lupin bit. I actually have some plans for a Story where Remus has a twin sister, so this would do wonders if I actually do it.

I won't touch the Time Turners. Even Rowling admits they were a bad idea.

The werewolf part was reasonably good. Same with the Secret Keeper.

Any guesses on what Rowling will reveal next?

 

I still demand to know how Horcruxes are made. I remember reading somewhere that Rowling stated that "It's a very disgusting process, horrifying."

Well I'm goddamn curious! What could it possibly be?! Necrophilia, cannibalism? What is it?!