8

In the Harry Potter and the Deathy Hallows, Harry used three wands to perform the Stupefy Charm to Fenrir Greyback, who was lifted off his feet by the triple spell, flew up to the ceiling and smashed the ground.

Having said this... using more than wand is ABSOLUTELY a quite huge advantage for wizards and witches to win a battle or a duel. If someone tries to cast a spell on someone, particularly the stunning spell, the one that receives the attack will surely fly high up into the air.

The question is, if every wizard in the books wants to win every single battle blocking their way, why don't they use more wands? That will surely help them a lot!

Invoker
  • 4,550
  • 2
  • 33
  • 64
  • 2
    Can you please ADD A COMMENT if why do you think you rate this post down so i know how to deal with it? – Invoker Nov 30 '16 at 04:01
  • 4
    Related: Can a wizard use more than one wand? and Do people normally own more than one wand? – Möoz Nov 30 '16 at 04:10
  • Also related: How would using two wands work? [duplicate] – Möoz Nov 30 '16 at 04:11
  • 2
    I didn't DV personally, but people here often don't like questions that ask "why didn't X do Y?" – Möoz Nov 30 '16 at 04:19
  • Okay it is my fault if i am getting straight to the point, OK – Invoker Nov 30 '16 at 16:29
  • 3
    I don't understand why is this question closed as duplicate. The referenced questions are about "Do/can people use more than one wand". This question is "why don't they use more than one". That's a different thing. – vap78 Dec 01 '16 at 11:41
  • @vap78 One of the linked dupes is asking whether people use more than one wand and if not, why not (which Mooz's answer addresses pretty well). – Rand al'Thor Dec 01 '16 at 12:21
  • @Randal'Thor did it say so why do wizards don't use more than one wands?. I don't think so. Read Mooz's answer again, find out if there is a point there specifically explaining why wizards don't use more than one wands. Can you explain to me? If not, then this question was closed as duplicate for a reason it was just thought to be a dupe of a question of someone else, which by any means, is bias and unfair. – Invoker Feb 03 '17 at 10:43
  • @BookStriker Mooz's answer stresses that "wands are exceptionally special to a wizard" (with a kind of personal bond), and his final paragraph says there wouldn't be much point in having an extra one. PearsonArtPhoto's answer again says there wouldn't be much point, as "most of the work is done by thought". Remember you have the ability to vote to reopen if you feel this question shouldn't be closed - if enough others agree with you, it'll be reopened. You do have an answer here already though. – Rand al'Thor Feb 03 '17 at 12:36

1 Answers1

6

I don't think there is a direct canon explanation for this.

Logical explanation:

When Harry used three wands it was just a reflex:

He leapt over an armchair and wrestled the three wands from Draco's grip, pointed them at Greyback, and yelled, "Stupefy!" The werewolf was lifted off his feet by the triple spell, flew up to the ceiling...

So he simply did not have time to drop two of the wands and cast the spell with only one. It is unknown whether this "triple spell" caused more damage than the one-wand Stupefy.

In all other cases the wizards use only one wand all the time. If two or more wands provided any significant advantage they would use them.

A real-world example - using two weapons like two swords or two guns is not very easy and is more for the show than anything else. It takes lots of training to master this and still is of questionable benefit. This Wikipedia article explains it in more details: Dual Wield

vap78
  • 19,271
  • 13
  • 90
  • 150
  • 3
    Basically, if you're not ambidextrous, try doing anything that requires a reasonable amount of skill with your non-dominant hand. Then instead, imagine you were trying to accurately hit enemies while also doing the same with your dominant hand. Simply put, you'd have to be nothing short of gifted for this to be practical on the simplest of levels. – Broots Waymb Nov 30 '16 at 16:09