Crossover Muggles in Harry Potter

[Spartan303]

It has been ages since I've read the books but... yeah, muggles in the Harry Potter setting are completely incapable of fighting back if the magicals decide to fight. It goes into the Jackie Chan Adventures of 'Magic can only defeat Magic!' thought process.

Which makes absolutely no sense. Because they're as human as anyone. And for every one Tom Riddle and Harry Potter you have a hundred average Joe's and Jane's who can barely perform basic Shield spells. Hence why the Weasleys enchanted clothing was so popular.

 

[Aaron Fox]

Which makes absolutely no sense. Because they're as human as anyone. And for every one Tom Riddle and Harry Potter you have a hundred average Joe's and Jane's who can barely perform basic Shield spells. Hence why the Weasleys enchanted clothing was so popular.

First, it takes some time for a shield spell to be cast by the mookiest of magical mooks -not 'barely perform basic shield spells' as you put it (at least, to my recollection)- outside of a class setting, thus why the shield-enchanted clothing was so popular. Given that the Death Eaters have a thing for simply doing gangster style hit and run attacks so you can't simply have the shield up at all times either.

Not only that, but Harry Potter-verse magic also runs on what would be considered Fae Logic, aka 'no limits, incredibly few counters if any, and fuck you mortals'. That is the key aspect that people forget, 'Magic' in Potter-verse runs on Fae Logic...

Hence the 'Magic can only defeat Magic' comment.


(cue obligatory Uncle clip)

From what I remember, muggles are just that disadvantaged against even the mookiest of magical mooks. The magicals hold all the cards in combat, combine that with the 'magic can only defeat magic' logic that the series is built upon... you get the situation where muggles can't win.

 

[Spartan303]

I don't believe in no limits. Every system, to include magic has limits. The sad fact is JK Rowlings hasn't been clear on exactly what they are.

 

[Aaron Fox]

I don't believe in no limits. Every system, to include magic has limits. The sad fact is JK Rowlings hasn't been clear on exactly what they are.

Then you haven't looked into fae logic then. I have and it always ends badly for the mortal involved. Although they -as a narrative system- went out thanks to Christianity, they experienced a resurgence when JK Rowling 'reintroduced' it to the wider world.

Fae logic is as I described: few rules, no limits, few if any counters, and a major 'fuck you' to mortals.

 

[Doomsought]

I don't believe in no limits. Every system, to include magic has limits. The sad fact is JK Rowlings hasn't been clear on exactly what they are.

There are limits, they are just arbitrary and often nonsensical until someone lets you in on the cosmic joke that justifies them.

 

[Aaron Fox]

There are limits, they are just arbitrary and often nonsensical until someone lets you in on the cosmic joke that justifies them.

Harry Potter magic runs on Fae logic, which there isn't much in terms of limits and give no fucks for mortals.

 

[Bear Ribs]

I don't believe in no limits. Every system, to include magic has limits. The sad fact is JK Rowlings hasn't been clear on exactly what they are.

"No Limits" and "No Limits a being like you could possible invoke or even understand" are functionally the same even if they're conceptually quite different.

 

[Aaron Fox]

"No Limits" and "No Limits a being like you could possible invoke or even understand" are functionally the same even if they're conceptually quite different.

Hence why I keep saying that Potter magic runs on Fae logic...

 

[Spartan303]

We'll have to disagree then.

 

[S'task]

Then you haven't looked into fae logic then. I have and it always ends badly for the mortal involved. Although they -as a narrative system- went out thanks to Christianity, they experienced a resurgence when JK Rowling 'reintroduced' it to the wider world.

Fae logic is as I described: few rules, no limits, few if any counters, and a major 'fuck you' to mortals.

Except... that's hardly true.

Fae, even their logic, have always had long lists of rules that limit them, as well as explicit weaknesses, often to quite common things (iron, crusts of bread, the sound of bells). The point of faery logic isn't that it's unlimited, it's that it doesn't follow human logic, though there are certain rules BOTH the fae and humans are expected to follow, such as the idea of "Sacred Hospitality" but because of their magical nature faeries take MORE seriously than humans.

That said, I think you're going to need to define what you mean by "fae logic", as that term doesn't appear to have a generally accepted definition, and doesn't really show up in anywhere that tends to define and use terms.

 

[Aaron Fox]

Except... that's hardly true.

Fae, even their logic, have always had long lists of rules that limit them, as well as explicit weaknesses, often to quite common things (iron, crusts of bread, the sound of bells). The point of faery logic isn't that it's unlimited, it's that it doesn't follow human logic, though there are certain rules BOTH the fae and humans are expected to follow, such as the idea of "Sacred Hospitality" but because of their magical nature faeries take MORE seriously than humans.

That said, I think you're going to need to define what you mean by "fae logic", as that term doesn't appear to have a generally accepted definition, and doesn't really show up in anywhere that tends to define and use terms.

That is after Christianity got its hands on them and basically scrubbed them. While some of the limits were already there ('cold iron' being one of them), fae in the original incarnations of the stories tended to have very little in terms of rules. At least, that is what I can scrounge up...

 

[Doomsought]

That is after Christianity got its hands on them and basically scrubbed them. While some of the limits were already there ('cold iron' being one of them), fae in the original incarnations of the stories tended to have very little in terms of rules. At least, that is what I can scrounge up...

Before it was usually a matter of bribery or oaths. The Fae were animistic deities.

 

[S'task]

That is after Christianity got its hands on them and basically scrubbed them. While some of the limits were already there ('cold iron' being one of them), fae in the original incarnations of the stories tended to have very little in terms of rules. At least, that is what I can scrounge up...

Citation needed on this. And not from some myth reconstructionists who tend to make up a bunch of stuff that fits into what they wish the world was like, rather than what it actually was like.

Also, you do know what the term "cold iron" means, right? It's an old fashioned way of saying "cold steel" which is just a poetic way of saying "edged weapons". In other words, saying Faeries were vulnerable to "cold iron" was saying "they bleed, and if it bleeds, it can be killed". Basically what this is really communicating to people is that faeries might APPEAR powerful, but that they were as vulnerable as any other mortal.

Before it was usually a matter of bribery or oaths. The Fae were animistic deities.

I'm going to need another citation on that.

SOME faery creatures trace back to ancient Pantheons (or hero myths, we're actually not sure), but that is SPECIFICALLY Celtic and Welch fae. Germanic and Norse Fae have minimal connection to those, and things like Brownies, Goblins, and such are quite different in origin.

That said, you're right about oaths, but another traditional area fae have always been bound by is the law of sacred hospitality, which go bad a VERY long way.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Also, you do know what the term "cold iron" means, right? It's an old fashioned way of saying "cold steel" which is just a poetic way of saying "edged weapons". In other words, saying Faeries were vulnerable to "cold iron" was saying "they bleed, and if it bleeds, it can be killed". Basically what this is really communicating to people is that faeries might APPEAR powerful, but that they were as vulnerable as any other mortal.

A bit off topic, but I've heard a fascinating theory about that. Essentially (in the case of Britain at least) the "cold iron" vulnerability is a dim cultural memory of our ancestors wiping out the older inhabitants of the British isles with metal weaponry. These people, who may have been a bit more in touch with nature, are then vaguely remembered as the Fair Folk. It's a suitably grim origin, at least so goes the theory.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

If nothing else I rather doubt the average wizard's shielding spell will enable them to survive any weapon that's more powerful most small arms fire and of course there's the ye old problem of wands not having sights and having terrible ergonomics for anything outside of 25 yards.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

If nothing else I rather doubt the average wizard's shielding spell will enable them to survive any weapon that's more powerful most small arms fire and of course there's the ye old problem of wands not having sights and having terrible ergonomics for anything outside of 25 yards.

Sniper rifles must essentially be dark sorcery to this lot. "What do you mean you can blow someone's head off from a kilometer away?"

The Wizarding World does not understand modern warfare, let alone posses the capability to fight it.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

Sniper rifles must essentially be dark sorcery to this lot. "What do you mean you can blow someone's head off from a kilometer away?"

The Wizarding World does not understand modern warfare, let alone posses the capability to fight it.

Can you imagine how useful a battalion of M270s MRLS being on call would have been at the battle of Hogwarts, to be fair it wouldn't have been much of battle more like making the grounds look like the moon

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

If nothing else I rather doubt the average wizard's shielding spell will enable them to survive any weapon that's more powerful most small arms fire and of course there's the ye old problem of wands not having sights and having terrible ergonomics for anything outside of 25 yards.

Eh, even just assuming the crudest force-to-force relationship, in the films at least we see average spells in the range of something like hand grenades.

 

[Spartan303]

Can you imagine how useful a battalion of M270s MRLS being on call would have been at the battle of Hogwarts, to be fair it wouldn't have been much of battle more like making the grounds look like the moon

Hell, not even that. A couple of well placed snipers in the towers, a company of Infantry and a Machine gun nest or two could work.

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

Hell, not even that. A couple of well placed snipers in the towers, a company of Infantry and a Machine gun nest or two could work.

The battle of hogwarts shows that there is a significant role in wizarding combat for masses of non-casters, even if they suffer a tremendous rate of attrition. The simple presence of the spiders shows as much, an attack dog would be no less dangerous.

Its a situation where you need some wizards or the combat is a non-starter, but once you have a critical number of wizards that you don't get steam rolled, non-wizards become crucial. One wizard and one man with a gun have a better chance of beating two wizards than ten men with guns have of beating one wizard.