12

We know that Avada Kedavra is "unblockable"

Why doesn't everyone use Avada Kedavra then, Molly Weasley vs. Bellatrix for example?

Why didn't they both just cast Avada Kedavra to finish the duel instantly?

Valorum
  • 689,072
  • 162
  • 4,636
  • 4,873
Roel
  • 439
  • 2
  • 7
  • 13
  • 2
    It actually isn't "unblockable" (http://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/30808/30726) – BMWurm Sep 03 '15 at 14:44
  • Because it requires a great deal of effort and concentration to cast it and if you miss, you're wide open for a counter-attack. Unblockable doesn't mean you can't simply evade it. – Valorum Sep 03 '15 at 14:46
  • 4
  • VTRO. As my answer shows, the other question isn't a dupe since 1/2 of this question isn't addressed – DVK-on-Ahch-To Sep 03 '15 at 18:52
  • 5
    See also http://scifi.stackexchange.com/q/22368/4918 "Why don't Death Eaters always use Avada Kedavra?" and http://scifi.stackexchange.com/q/21737/4918 "Why were the Death Eaters so lenient during the fight at the Department of Mysteries?" – b_jonas Sep 03 '15 at 19:10
  • @BMWurm "'Not pleasant. And there's no counter-curse. There's no blocking it. Only one person has ever survived it, and he's sitting right in front of me.'" Thus saith Barty Crouch Jr as Mad-Eye Moody in GoF (Chapter 14 The Unforgivable Curses). Yes you can put obstacles in front of it, to take the blow, but that's it, apart from the extremely rare case of Priori Incantatem. But Dumbledore himself explains that that's the wands refusing to work against each other, not 'blocking' – Au101 Sep 04 '15 at 00:17
  • @Au101 If "putting obstacles in front of it" is not a way of 'blocking' it, no spell could be blocked, only countered: for a shield charm is just that, an obstacle. Or in the real world there would be no way to block bullets either, for all that can ever be done is putting something in between shooter and target. – BMWurm Sep 04 '15 at 07:36
  • All the dueling on the background the green bolts fired by Voldi's followers is that AK? – Roel Sep 04 '15 at 10:19
  • @BMWurm I'm not really sure I agree with your understanding of 'block'. I mean, if you do martial arts, for example, I don't think getting behind an obstacle, or putting some object in the way of a punch or a kick would count as 'blocking'. I suppose some people might think of holding up a shield as 'blocking' a punch, but one usually understands the term as a parry with an arm or a leg. And I think the equivalent is what Rowling has in mind with 'blocking' too, if you read Flight of the Prince (HBP), where Snape 'deflects' Harry's spells with his wand and this is described as blocking. – Au101 Sep 04 '15 at 17:53
  • And it would seem odd for her to have Barty Crouch make a mistake when she uses him to explain the power of Avada Kedavra and there's no canon example of AK being stoppable (if you prefer). The point is, if it's coming for you, you either have to get out of its way, or put something between yourself and it, because there's no parry, there's no counter, there's no magic that can repel, deflect, divert or otherwise block it. Shield charms also won't work on AK. – Au101 Sep 04 '15 at 17:56
  • http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/101961/what-is-this-spell/101978#101978[/LINK] For more about AK > we could use a few hands there to answer some questions. – Roel Sep 04 '15 at 18:17

2 Answers2

29
  • Why Death Eaters didn't use AK was already discussed here: Why don't Death Eaters always use Avada Kedavra?

    Also, while not mentioned in canon, another reason Bellatrix specifically didn't use it in a duel with Molly was underestimating the opponent. She was not exactly thinking rationally.

  • As far as why those opposing Death Eaters (let's notionally call them Good People) didn't use it:

    1. You need to be a strong magic user for AK to work. Fake-Moody explained that in GoF:

      "Avada Kedavra's a curse that needs a powerful bit of magic behind it — you could all get your wands out and point them at me and say the words, and I doubt I'd get so much as a nosebleed."

    2. Legal repercussions.

      Avada Kedavra is illegal. Aurors needed explicit authorization in the First Wizarding War to use the three Unforgivable Curses.

    3. They are "moral".

      They don't wish to kill.

    4. They obviously aren't trained in using it.

      Especially housewife Molly Weasley, since your question explicitly singled her out.

    5. Specific to Molly's duel - she wouldn't want to use Avada Kedavra since a miss would be risking to kill an innocent bystander, even if she knew how to cast Avada Kedavra.

DVK-on-Ahch-To
  • 342,451
  • 162
  • 1,520
  • 2,066
  • Which spell did Molly then use? The green bolts ( movie ) she fired? Bellatrix did protecht herself from. – Roel Sep 03 '15 at 14:47
  • 3
    @Roel - Good question. One previously asked - as it happened, by me :))) – DVK-on-Ahch-To Sep 03 '15 at 14:48
  • 3
    I find it difficult to believe that Bellatrix isn't powerful enough to pull off an AK, she certainly wouldn't care about the legal ramifications and she was quite clearly trying to kill Mrs Weasley. – Valorum Sep 03 '15 at 14:49
  • @Roel mentions the Molly-vs-Bella-duel and the latter certainly wouldn't care about 2 or 3 and is more than strong enough for 1 - as she herself mentions to Harry that you have to mean the Unforgivables in OOtP. – BMWurm Sep 03 '15 at 14:50
  • @Richard - my assumption is that the question was centered on normal people, not DEs (the latter was already covered) – DVK-on-Ahch-To Sep 03 '15 at 14:50
  • 7
    @Richard Bellatrix is also quite sadistic remember. She may enjoy 'playing with her food', so to speak. – Dr R Dizzle Sep 03 '15 at 14:52
  • @BMWurm - hope the edits clarified visavi specific question wording – DVK-on-Ahch-To Sep 03 '15 at 14:54
  • @DVK They did ... and Richard had beaten me by a couple of seconds anyway... – BMWurm Sep 03 '15 at 15:07
  • 4
    @DrRDizzle’s point is very salient: Bellatrix wouldn’t want to use Avada Kedavra except as a last resort, because that would deprive her of a chance to torture her opponents. She enjoys battling and inflicting pain far too much to want to go for a simple, pain-free ‘bang, you’re dead’ solution. Contrast this with Voldemort who didn’t care an iota about the lives of others, but who didn’t take any particular sadistic pleasure in inflicting pain in them either. Crucio was simply a tool for him, a means to an end. To Bellatrix, it was like royal entertainment. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Sep 03 '15 at 15:31
  • What about sirius then ;)? – Roel Sep 03 '15 at 15:50
  • All the dueling on the background the green bolts? is that AK ? – Roel Sep 03 '15 at 15:51
  • "Yes, but the world isn't split into Good People and Death Eaters" - Sirius Black ;-) – Rand al'Thor Sep 03 '15 at 19:02
  • Molly wanted to cast "Magic Missile" – Verdan Mar 24 '17 at 15:49
9

There are a variety of reasons. Avada Kedavra isn't the bread-and-butter spell it might seem.

  • First and foremost, as mentioned elsewhere, Avada Kedavra is a very difficult spell to cast effectively. As Bellatrix says, and as Harry notes with the Imperius Curse later on, "you have to mean it." The fact that Voldemort can sling around Killing Curses without any trouble is a sign of his prodigious magical abilities and of his single-minded desire to kill his opponents. In the midst of a pitched duel, there's not much difference between killing or disabling your opponent with a curse like Dolohov's, using Avada Kedavra or even Stunning them, although in the latter case they might be revived by their compatriots. Thus, since the Killing Curse is so much harder to cast, most combatants will opt for a different spell. We see that even most Death Eaters don't use this curse continually. Only Bellatrix and of course Voldemort seem to be able to keep it up.

  • Avada Kedavra can't be blocked by any magical shield or counterspell, but it can be blocked by interposing an object between oneself and the attack. As shown by Dumbledore, this is a highly effective method. Spells that move objects or potentially even conjure them can be an effective defense in the hands of a skilled magic user. Some spells other than Avada Kedavra may simply ignore the presence of objects or produce effects that go around them.

  • Although it's not elaborated on, most offensive spells seem to travel at finite speeds. Avada Kedavra in particular is slow enough to dodge. This, by the way, is one reason it wouldn't have immediately ended the duel. In fact, the odds are good that they were both casting Avada Kedavra; Molly Weasley's spell was simply the first that hit. Physical ability is in fact rather important in dueling, all else being equal. It's no coincidence that Harry, with his excellent Quidditch reflexes, is so good at combat magic. With this in mind, there may well be spells that travel faster than Avada Kedavra but are more easily blocked, creating a trade-off.

  • Some spells can affect areas, whereas the Killing Curse affects a single target. This makes them potentially much more useful in an asymmetric fight; even if the opponents have a better chance of blocking them, they could take out multiple opponents at once, whereas Avada Kedavra would take out only one, leaving one open to a counterattack. An example of this would be Grindelwald's Protego Horribilium from the second Fantastic Beast film: it let him take out many targets at once. But this tradeoff isn't limited to fancy spells that only very powerful witches and wizards can use: Reductor, which blows things up, is a more common example.

  • If your opponent is too weak or not inclined to use Avada Kedavra, but they're dodging your attacks and firing back some spells, you may be better served by casting a defensive spell instead. For instance, Voldemort had to conjure up a shield against one of Dumbledore's attacks.

  • The Killing Curse is not proof against Apparition, which allows one both to evade it or simply to escape. Thus, in some circumstances it might be best to cast spells that limit Apparition first. With the capability of killing people before they successfully Disapparate, Grindelwald's spell is an example of this as well.

Adamant
  • 116,314
  • 35
  • 473
  • 648
  • 1
    A corollary of your 1st point is that in a pitched battle frequent casting of AK would be emotionally and physically exhausting, even if most of the shots fail to kill your opponents. For psycho killers like Bella & Voldy it may be less emotionally taxing (and clearly Bella gets a manic rush when inflicting death & destruction), but it must still be a physical drain. So you might as well concentrate on easier spells that don't deplete your strength as quickly. (I'd put this into an answer, but that would really need quotes that verify that AK is more exhausting than other battle spells). – PM 2Ring Aug 04 '19 at 08:56
  • 1
    In addition there is at least one creature that can intercept it (phoenix), which merely causes a rebirth. – JohnP Aug 04 '19 at 20:12