I really should have read the forum first. When I got the notification for ~20 new chapters. I thought that, I will need to re-read it all, to remind myself before getting to second half of the story.

Well I did and it is still good. I am a little sad about dropping the old magic theme, but I understand your reasoning.

TBH that and trimming of the GL play were the only changes I really noticed (beyond the Auror guild redefinition, but that hasn’t really had much impact yet.)

Honestly, my only gripe is the blasted diary.

Spoiler: Spoiler

Victoria’s acceptance just seems contrary to her otherwise suspicious nature. She generally keeps her secrets close to her chest. Has internally decided not to blindly trust Malfoy OR Dumbledore. Was on to Lockhart from the start, had doubts about Hagrid hell even Pansy she mistrust.

But sentient book, that teaches her dark magic (after her best friend warns he AND is a a victim thereof) and makes her cry the molten steel (which in the end was unnecessary as mastering was instead achieved by embracing Dumbledore advice) yup that is definitely something I can and should trust. Despite it clearly having ulterior motivations (and as far as she knows, lying)

otherwise great story the worldbuilding and especially the magicbuilding are great and joy to read. I really hope it will continue.

 

Just read the rewrite. It’s definitely an improvement. I think the malfoy manor scene was greatly improved.

cant wait for new chapters

 

Link is broken

 

Did Taure delete his fanfiction account? I followed his story and him and both disappeared.

The story should be saved on this website in the Work by Author section though.

 

Some of his stories are on Ao3.

 

I guess this is the link?

https://archiveofourown.org/works/13795605/chapters/31714617

 

Indeed, in case people were unaware, I have been posting Year 3 to AO3:

https://archiveofourown.org/works/42238365/chapters/106052223

 

Just curious, why have you removed all your stories from FFN?

 

@Zombie I have no idea if you're still the mod for the review board/library, but the ffn link for VP hasn't worked for a while. Taure moved it over to AO3 and split it into 3 parts. I know that it's already been mentioned up above, but would you be able to change the OP to reflect this?
Cheers.

 

I'm not sure I agree with the whole Voldemort vs. Grindelwald thing. I get that you're trying to worldbuild Voldemort as more powerful and dangerous, and the older Slytherins are certainly biased, but it feels like you're underselling Grindelwald in the process. He was able to go up against Dumbledore in his prime, while Tom faced him a few times when he was 90-100 years old. And while Voldemort was usually depicted as flashier in the movies, Grindelwald's fire spell in Paris was pretty insane. And unless he's in a dick-measuring contest with Dumbledore, Tom only throws Killing Curses around anyway. Grindelwald was much more of a global threat than Voldemort and had multiple Ministries of Magic after him, while Tom was only going up against the British Ministry. His plan to abolish the statute of secrecy and subjugate the muggles also put him in direct opposition to the ICW. Based on canon, Grindelwald was the more dangerous dark lord to the whole world. He would happily start shit in any country, stomp the local auror forces single-handedly and make it look easy. Just watch the scene at the end of Fantastic Beasts 1, where the MACUSA aurors would have gotten wrecked without Newt's pokemons. He was absolutely relentless there. I find it hard to believe that an auror would describe Grindelwald as "just a man", when he routinely went through aurors like a hot knife through butter.

 

What is this in response to exactly?

 

The last few chapters. Specifically, Victoria's conversations with Tom about Grindelwald and with the international aurors about Voldemort.

 

Spoiler: Voldemort is stronger than Grindelwald

Dumbledore was able to defeat Grindelwald without killing or seriously injuring him, suggesting to me at least that either the power difference between the two was so great that Dumbledore didn't have to go all out, Grindelwald surrendered or let himself lose, or that Dumbledore didn't duel but ambushed or tricked him.

In contrast to this, while Voldemort technically ceded his duel to Dumbledore in OotP, neither wizard had a clear advantage over the other, despite Dumbledore having the Elder Wand. I don't think that Dumbledore would have gotten weaker in his old age personally, if anything I think that he was quite a bit stronger, but even low balling him, I'd put an OotP Dumbledore with the elder Wand above or equal to the Dumbledore who defeated Grindelwald. The point of all of this is that I think that Voldemort was a better duelist.

All of that is basically irrelevant though, because none of the characters you're talking about have actually met or fought Grindelwald, they only know him by reputation, and they're also unreliable narrators.

 

I'm pretty sure that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were pretty evenly matched, with Dumbledore having a slight edge. I think at their level, the Elder Wand wasn't adding that much in terms of power. It's also not too hard to believe that a transfiguration master could bind Grindelwald after an epic and hard-fought duel.

Spoiler: Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore

In their duel at the end of Fantastic Beasts 3 they were pretty evenly matched.

 

I'm not sure that I consider Fantastic Beasts canon to the books, but either way I haven't watched the third one. Whatever way you look at it though, in VP, the only person who would actually know the answer to that question (Dumbledore) hasn't said anything. The other characters are just speculating, and I don't think that it's unreasonable to assume that Voldemort had a reputation for being a more dangerous duelist than Grindelwald in canon, regardless of whether or not that's true.

(Also, I see that duels in number 3 are back to pure light shows. They have such a large budget that they could easily put in some transfiguration or whatever but no.)

 

Well, considering Rowling pretty much wrote them, they are basically canon, whether you like it or not. And while it's true that the duels are light-shows, I really liked the fast-paced fight with combat apparitions. Not so sure about the wand-fu, but whatever. This definitely shows that age matters in a duel. As you grow older, your musculature atrophies and your reflexes get slower. And while Dumbledore had more experience when he was fighting Tom, decades of being an administrator/politician and no fighting to keep him sharp probably meant that he was past his prime.
Voldemort was a superb duelist and could take on McGonagall, Slughorn and Shacklebolt at the same time and dominate them, but based on Grindelwald's duels against aurors so far, he could do the same.

Spoiler: VP Book 3 and FB 1+2

Taure has clearly tried to hype up Voldemort in his worldbuilding with the Great Dark spell and him murdering people around the world. I just felt like he deliberately undersold Grindelwald. No auror should describe him as "powerful, but just a man", when he was an absolute nightmare for anyone not named Albus Dumbledore. In Paris, he literally burned the panicking aurors out of disapparition while chiding them like disobedient children. In New York, he marched towards a firing squad of 15+ aurors and started to pick them off one by one. He was the bogeyman during his reign of terror, which lasted decades. Give the man his due, Taure.

 

Is the entirety of Fantastic Beasts canon to VP though?

 

https://forums.darklordpotter.net/threads/grindelwald-vs-voldemort.38507/#post-1099343

Only two points not addressed there are:

1. Grindelwald was a global threat - addressed in the story chapter itself (the nature of Voldemort's threat is scarier, notwithstanding its smaller geographic scale - boogieman vs. politician - Grindelwald might have been wizard Hitler, but Voldemort was on the verge of becoming wizard Sauron).

2. Dumbledore is old in OotP - no sign that this is any kind of disadvantage; I would call OotP Dumbledore his prime from a duelling perspective, not 1945. His reaction times in OotP are still faster than Harry can follow with his eyes. He may not be able to jump and roll about, but if you're doing that you're shit at duelling anyway.

 

Well, that's up to Taure. But so far he has at least acknowledged the movies.

Spoiler: VP BOOK 1+3

In the first book, when Victoria shares a train compartment with the girls, Susan complains that her tutor, Mrs. Graves, won't shut up about Grindelwald. In the first FB movie, Grindelwald impersonates Percival Graves, Head of the DMLE of MACUSA. In the third book, Tom shows Victoria a memory of a Grindelwald rally he attended in Paris in 1942. This seems to be a nod to FB 2 depicting the Grindelwald rally of 1927, where he shows the french witches and wizards a vision of WW2 and the nuclear bomb. The international aurors also mention Grindelwald's proclivity to hold recruitment rallies and engage in politics, which could be a reference to FB 3 and his attempt to become the Supreme Mugwump of the ICW in 1932.

@Taure I disagree with your post in that thread. Dumbledore used his familiar strategically to avoid apparating, dispelling the snake and trapping Voldemort rather than being put on the backfoot. Voldemort by no means won that duel. If anything, one could argue that Dumbledore didn't try too hard since he didn't want to disembody Voldemort, which would have ruined his Harry-Horcrux gambit. The man was playing 4D chess.

And while Voldemort may have been more of a bogeyman in Britain, he struggled to take over a single country. Grindelwald was murdering aurors on two continents and almost succeeded in taking over the ICW. And that was in 1932, so that leaves 13 more years of terrorizing the world until Dumbledore finally beat him.

 

The movies aren't canon, they can't be considered such because they contradict the one true canon which is the seven book series.