10

As far as I am aware, in Harry Potter, a wand is simply a means of channelling magic.

In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, at Malfoy Manor, Harry grabs three wands from Draco and performs a triple-spell on his enemy. The force of the triple spell wasn't divided by three. Instead, the books mentions that it was multiplied by three.

Thinking about it, he increased his magical power by channelling it through not one but three wands simultaneously. If this can be done by wands, why didn't wizards think of congregating wands into one single powerful tool? Or maybe using some special Wand-like tools to increase channeling of magic through a Wand?

I'm not sure if what Harry did was a pure accident but had I seen this effect produced by three wands then I think I'd have bound multiple wands together with rubber tape.

The Dark Lord
  • 61,853
  • 39
  • 275
  • 394
SovereignSun
  • 2,585
  • 4
  • 17
  • 29
  • 4
    Maybe it makes spells harder to control, like trying to shoot multiple guns, and Harry just got lucky. – PlutoThePlanet Jun 07 '18 at 17:01
  • 7
    Like so many details in Harry Potter, I think it really boils down to, because J. K. Rowling likes to throw in details without considering the implications. – Kai Jun 07 '18 at 17:16
  • Out of universe, I would say that JKR is aware that there are enough superweapons in SF&F as it is. Also, throwing together several wands in order to multiply a spell's effectiveness would take away from the suspense that wizard duels are based on skill, and not sheer power. – DCOPTimDowd Jun 07 '18 at 18:29
  • I bet using 3 or more wands simultaneously might destroy a horcrux. Voldemort wouldn't want that, right? – SovereignSun Jun 07 '18 at 18:31
  • 3
    Possible in universe explanation: many spells are an on/off sort of deal: either they work or they don't. No point in using multiple wands then. Maybe only a few spells actually benefit from additional wands. Meanwhile, unless you have the foresight to get chosen by multiple wands (is that even possible?), and use them all equally, how much more effective would it be actually? Maybe Harry using three only counteracted the fact that none of them were his, getting the same effect as one wand that actually belonged to him. – Kai Jun 07 '18 at 22:08
  • 1
    "The werewolf was lifted off his feet by the triple spell, flew up to the ceiling and then smashed to the ground." — I think the text isn't clear that "triple spell" means "stronger than usual". Harry was scared and very angry, and we know that emotions affect spell intensity. An emotionally-supercharged spell, divided by three and then added back together, would still be stronger than a regular spell. – Gaultheria Jun 07 '18 at 22:47
  • 1
    They need to make a wand that goes up to 11 – user13267 Jun 08 '18 at 03:01

0 Answers0