One thing I overlooked is the whole wand ownership thing. My thoughts surrounding that are: Snape would kill Dumbledore without him ever being disarmed by Draco (making him the rightful owner). However, Snape himself would later be disarmed by Harry during their confrontation after the death of Dumbledore. This would ensure that Voldemort, after killing Snape, still wouldn't be the true owner of the elder wand.
This video was actually super interesting. I loved it! It had so many consequences and you analyzed them so well and presented it all soo interesting! I watched with my eyes closed and it felt like I was in a movie.
I wonder, since Dumbledore would've let Snape disarm kill him, would the wand still change allegiance or would it have known that it wasn't truly earned since it could feel its master holding back?
If this happened, who would have checked Harry's body in the forbiden forest? If it was still Narssica, Harry would have definitly died, and Voldemort would have won
Harry can't die as long as Voldemort lives cause he's got a piece of him inside Voldemort when he took his blood to regain a body. Wouldve been an infinite loops of Avada Kedavra and going back to life
@@dank_memes_101 I doubt even Lucius could kill Harry, because the magic that bind Harry and Voldemort. Harry could become Voldemort's immortal prisoner, tortured for eternity
Voldemort would try to kill harry again but he would lose his body due to the fact that the Avada Kedavra spell would rebound onto him, due to Harry being the master of the Eldert Wand. So Then Voldemort would be still alive but with no body, at least until Nagini is destroyed.
With the entire wizarding community believing him to be the one who defeats Voldemort, Harry would not be sent to Azkaban or expelled from the school, but would be infamous for killing a fellow student
At the Headquarters of the Order: "I wonder what Dumbledore is doing right now to stop Voldemort" *Dumbledore drinking vodka in his office, singing 'Odo the Hero' while the former Headmasters in the paintings hold their ears*
Harry killing classmates out of suspicion would have certainly shook the loyalty of some people, especially not the ones really close to him if they ever found out. And there's no guarantee that it would stay a secret after the 6th part since Voldemort controlled the press
To be fair, Harry was acting in self defense when he used Septum Sempra on Draco so it's not like he just used it on Draco as soon as he heard him crying and talking to Myrtle.
@@tempestfennac9687 Not really, by the english laws he could be accused of vigilantism and using excessive force in self defence (and after all, if you look at their former history you can call harry obsessed with draco), not to mention torture and cruelty since that spell slowly bleeds out the target, and I doubt that in court the excuse I didn't know what that spell do would hold, after all to use a spell you have to know it and how to cast it, unless Dumbledore manages somehow to cover it up (the murder of the only heir of a prominent wizengamot and sacred 28th family? We are not talking of someone like moaning Myrtle, between her and draco the difference could be similar to the one between Tom the elderly shop owner at the end of the road and a member of the royal family, and they almost closed Hogwarts for her death) I don't really like Harry 's chances
@@88atahualpa I agree those would be issues (I was responding to the comment Blue made about Harry's motives for using the spell on Draco). I'd assume murder would get life imprisonment in Azkaban but I don't know how the Wizarding world would see self defense like this (especially since they could, if they were inclined to use it, verify that Draco was going for a Crucio when Harry cut him).
The only thing that I could see going differently is Belatrix being the one to ask Voldemort to determine if Harry did kill Draco. Lucius was not on Voldemorts good side at this point so I'm skeptical Voldemort would've granted him this favor. Belatrix however was his top Death Eater and likely could've used that to ask for Voldemorts help on her sister's behalf
i don't think Bellatrix would've cared too much about Draco dying. she only taught him Occlumency to help him with the task of killing Dumbledore, not because she cared for him in any way (although it is possible she did so on Narcissa's request).
@@JuanMataCFC Bellatrix also taught Draco Occlumency to screw over Snape, since Bellatrix didn't want Snape "stealing all of the glory" to replace her as Voldemort's favorite. Bellatrix is definitely selfishly motivated when it comes to helping anyone.
Narsisa telling Voldemort that Harry is dead after there first confrontation. I think that is a little bit important. So Harry never left the Frobiden forest alive.
it's actually the second confrontation. Draco (despite recognizing him) refusing to give Harry up after the trio were brought to Malfoy Manor by Snatchers is the first.
@@lexilovesjesus9129 Hallows did not have that power. Dumbledore himself said that it wasn't gift from death but just powerfull objects from powerfull wizards. There is no prove that they have the power. Only reason he stayed alive was becouse Voldemort took his blood so Harry cannot die before Voldemort.
@@JustSomeSlavicBoy I'm pretty sure after the scene in the forest, the protection was nullified. Every part of Harry except for Voldemort's soul was protected by the blood in Voldemort. From what Harry said in the final chapter, it implied that neither of them had any magical protections and that the only remaining factor was the Elder Wand. Here's why I believe this: If the protection had indeed continued the same way it had after Voldemort's initial encounter with Harry, protecting him till he was 17 as long as he considered the Dursley's place home, then Voldemort would've suffered the same fate he did the first time. He wouldve gone back to the state of being less than human only able to possess others. And that didnt happen. Voldemort was very much still standing and alive after he used the Killing Curse on Harry. After the forest scene, Harry did not have the protection of his mother. In fact he did the same thing for the remaining survivors by sacrificing himself for them. The only reason Voldemort finally lost to Harry is because of the Elder Wand. Therefore, if Narcissa didnt lie to Voldemort about Harry being dead, Voldemort then kills him. Or more likely, in this scenario, as she wants revenge, she kills him herself quietly, and then tells Voldemort he is dead.
He was always alive, even if someone else checked. If Voldemort would've hit him with the killing curse again,he would've met with the same fate he did 17 years ago,because as long as Voldemort has Harry's blood he cannot kill him
Defining “protect Draco from harm” is definitely important. Imagine if he got the Hogwarts equivalent to a paper cut, or tripped and broke his nose, or got hurt playing Quidditch.
Lucius Malfoy was in Azkaban so no one in power would have cared that Draco was killed besides Harry-haters like Umbridge and Harry's friends and teachers. Dumbledore wouldn't have let a murder divert Harry from his main task of murdering Voldemort, no matter how much he disliked Harry after this.
Well that's the reason the malfoy aren't in gryffindor there just words never any action to prove their claim. I mean lucius didn't bother to care when Draco was transformed into an animal by moody.I think Draco naive to think that his father could save I wish someone wouls slap him to reality.
A quick request: How does the Wizarding Economy work? Do people have to pay tax to the Ministry of Magic? Is that how they pay the ministry employees and Hogwarts professors or the headmaster? How does Gringotts work? I mean, you deposit whatever you have in your vaults. So is that free of cost? Or the goblins use the gold for investment purposes? But it does sound unlikely that goblins would draw money out of the vaults for investment purposes? What do they do that for? Wizarding economy spins my head to be honest.
I’ve always seen it as the ministry just uses magic to duplicate the money (like the curse that was on bellatrix’s vault, I don’t remember the name of it), but they do it to only a reasonable extent to prevent inflation and to pay the minister employees.
@@RobertFerro3 that isn't how an economy works. If you mint money without keeping any gold reserves, you'll get a hell of an inflation. Duplicating money doesn't make sense. Do you even know how much money they have to duplicate for that purpose? That'll be a hyper inflation worse than Germany's in 1920s. Plus, you can't duplicate money, seeing as you can't create gold or something like that. Gold, silver and the copper used to make Knuts stand as an exception to Gamp's Law of Elementary Transfiguration. The only exception is Philosopher's stone, and there's a reason why Nicholas Flamel keeps it safe. And let's not forget that in the Wizarding World, there aren't many professions, at least compared to the the muggle world. And it's safe to assume that most people work under Ministry, or at least strive to work there.
Yea if Harry ended up killing Draco by accident due to this, it would have been a disaster for so many reasons. Even with it not being intentional, Harry would still have to deal with the immense guilt, and the same for Snape. I agree that Snape would not have died from the vow due to the "protecting to the best of his ability" part, but he would still have to add another person he was partially responsible for killing who he cared about to his psyche. It was due to a spell he created that another student found and unknowingly used. Even though Snape didn't directly or purposefully kill Draco, he would still have some moral responsibility in this scenario. I didn't think about what Snape would do with Harry, but him covering it up would actually make sense. His life would be in danger otherwise ,and he would have to protect the one out of the two boys left he swore to protect. It would make the Harry/Snape relationship even more complicated.
I mean I still doesn't understand why he wasn't proofed innocent. All three kids new it, lupin knew it and even Dumbledore knew it resulting in Snape (probably) believing it. A statement by thenm all should had proved thie truth or not?
@Mr Doctors13 (sry if wrong, it has been years since I read the books). But why didn't Snape believed it. Did he question Dumbledores decision-making?(this question is maybe easy because the ministry is pretty ignorant) but why did they believed earlier that Sirius killed Pettigrew and the muggles by less evidence
@@ichbinzwardummaber They don't have evidence. If they had Peter then the Ministry would believe, they don't take memories into consideration. Snape heard Lupin saying that he betrayed Dumbledore throughout the year, so he didn't believe them at all.
I believed that if Draco had died of the sectemsempra curse, Severus would be freed from that portion of the unbreakable vow, because the vow was worded as "...to the best of my ability I will protect Draco." This would mean that Severus had not arrived in time to cast the countercurse to save his godson.
@@lexilovesjesus9129 It's not said outright in either the books or the movies. However, the closeness of their relationship, coupled with the likelihood that Lucius was a semi-mentor to Severus during their own school years, mean that it was heavily implied. The idea just makes sense. (11/2/2021)
I think one vital moment you did not address is narcissus lying to Voldemort when she confirms Harry’s death. If he was the one to have killed her son, there’s no way she would have covered for Harry like she did in the story.
I think they could have easily covered up his death by outing his previous attempts at Dumbledore's life, and explaining "sectum sempra" away as another assassination attempt gone awry. They could say he was dabbling with dark magic that he didn't quite understand in order to kill Dumbledore, and this time the dark magic backfired on him and cost him his life.
Dracos mother less we forget lied to voldamore in the forest bc Harry told her her son was still alive. In this case she wouldn’t have lied which leads me to believe Harry would be killed this time since the holcrox in him was destroyed
Harry didn't not die because of the Horcrux though, but because of Lily Potters Love-Protection that is bound in Harry blood (Voldemort then used that same blood to be "revived" so that protection spell is kept, aslong as Voldemort lives)
@@scottymcmacc4888 Which was nullified in "Goblet of Fire" during the ritual at the graveyard, you know, that whole thing about Voldimort being able to touch Harry.
Hmmmmm.I think it would change greatly. I mean if Harry killed draco. When Harry is caught by snatchers and taken to the malfoys. Draco couldn't stall n say he wasn't sure. Or even if the malfoys found out Harry killed draco when Harry sacrificed himself to die in the forest to voldemort. narcissa defo would not of lied n Harry would of been killed again by her. I believe that if Harry had killed Draco with that spell Harry would of been killed and Lord voldemort would of had no horcruxs left so could of been killed in the end by neville Longbottom but Harry most definitely would be dead imo.
Dear friend, please refrain from using "could/would/should/might/... of". That doesn't exist. What you mean is "could/would/should/might/... have". Thank you.
I don't think Snape would have worked with Harry to cover it up. I think Dumbledore would have worked to cover it up, and a Snape would have, begrudgingly, gone alone with it.
@@TheAlphatitan while i don't think Snape would've willingly covered for Harry, i also don't think he would've tried to get Harry expelled. yes Snape gave Harry numerous detentions throughout his Hogwarts time, but he always knew he had to keep Harry safe. i feel like Dumbledore told Snape he could treat Harry as badly as he wanted to as long as he protected him from any kind of danger (including being expelled).
Question I've been asking myself for a long time (it's actually 2 but both are related to the same topic in HP); 1)Did in the time of colonization, the ministries of magic in the UK, France etc. control the colonies as well? Did they control it in a governor-style? For example- who did control India until 1948? 2)When there was major war in the muggle world (WW1, WW2, the cold war), were the representative ministries of magic in conflict as well? For example- did during the cold war, did MACUSA and the soviet ministry were in conflict?
@@oopharb7237 Grindelwald predicts WWII, shows it to several wizards which prompts them to join him. Arguably his idea of wizards domination over muggles stems from his views on how barbaric they've become and how that could affect the wizard community.
One thing that this would affect is Harry and Ginnys relationship. After that Ginny probably wouldn’t want to date Harry because he killed Draco. Or maybe she would overlook it as an accident. No idea.
I think something similiar would apply to James P. and Lily P., would she marry the guy that bullied her childhood friend, if she knew about it? And how would Ginny find out it was Harry, if everyone blames Voldemort?
I agree that snape wouldn't die from the vow had Draco died in a way he couldn't prevent, however doing Draco's task of killing Dumbledore would still be active since the vow was snape would have to do it if Draco was unable to do so.
You forgot something important, if Draco died there Snape would have become the true owner of the Elder Wand by Killing dumbledore. Wich means that Voldemort actually could be the true owner in the end. And that maybe could change the end of it all.
@@Enderjuusto1 not exactly... he vowed to protect Draco to the best of his ability. But if Harry used sectumsempra and Snape was not made aware of it or could not be there in time to deliver the counter curse he would still survive because he worked off of the information he had at the time. its a loophole in the vow. If he had said he will protect Draco no matter what. then yeah he would be dead
@@kimmyc247 But you forget another loophole: to the best of his ability. If Snape knew beforehand that Harry had the Half Blood Prince textbook and Snape did nothing about it, then that violated the "best of Snape's ability" part of the Unbreakable Vow. And Snape did know about the textbook once Slughorn praised Harry's potion making skills: Snape easily could have deduced beforehand that Harry had the textbook when Slughorn was boasting about Harry's amazing potions skills at the Slug Club Christmas party in December. So, Snape was kinda negligent if he never confiscated the textbook from Harry at any point afterwards. Thus, it really wasn't to the best of Snape's ability at all.
@@l.n.3372 like I said. if he was aware of it. But from what I remember. Snape wasn't aware of it until after Harry used his spell on Draco. So again it does come into a loophole of its own.
@@kimmyc247 Yes, it all depends on when Snape found out that Harry had the textbook. But your argument is under the possibility false assumption that Snape didn't know the truth until Sectumsempra. My argument is the opposite: Snape easily could have known months in advance and he still did nothing to prevent it. I think that Snape was aware of it for months beforehand. We even see at the Christmas party how suspicious Snape was after Slughorn was boasting. If Snape was suspicious and did nothing to confiscate the textbook, he's negligent and at fault, and thus broke the Unbreakable Vow. He only didn't die because he saved Draco's life immediately, but that was pure luck that he was nearby when moaning Myrtle was yelling about murder in the bathroom.
I don't think Lucius would dare ask Voldemort to procure evidence of Harry killing Draco. All Deatheaters were scared shitless to even ask the Dark Lord for a breathmint. And I don’t think Voldy would agree either. What would he get out of it?
Doenst matter its actually that he would do it just so he can let Lucius suffer the fact that he knows who the killer is but can't do anything about it.
@@denizkenger52 Unintentionally or not, he meant to harm Draco so he was far from innocent. I believe it would have stayed with him forever, I can't believe you really forget who you kill
3 роки тому+5
I dont think ripping soul works like that. Because Harry did not know Sectumsempra's effect. He did not send it for killing. Also even if he sent it to killing, purpose is important. Righteous causes (like revenge) wont work like getting pleasure from murdering.
When Voldy killed Harrys Mom, he accidentaly produced a Horcrux, right? Maybe Harry would have produced a Horcrux by killing Malfoy? The only living thing around would probably be Snape... Imagine Snape being Harrys Horcrux 😅
It's hard to tell what the exact rules for the soul ripping are. Remorse fixes it. Harry would ahve that so if it did fracture, it would repair eventually. However, I'm not sure it would have cracked in the first place because it was not intentional so not technically murder. We hypothesized the same for Snape killing Dumbledore because Dumbledore asked Snape to do it, so his soul would likely be unfractured. Granted, in theory if commiting murder breaks your soul in this world, then all bad deeds would do some sort of damage, so harry would likely have some sort of more serious issue with his soul after this. I would think it would heal, though.
Voldemort would have came to power if Malfoy was killed by Harry. If Malfoy died, Severus wouldn't have helped Harry. He would have seen him as his father James Potter. He would have taken Harry and the corpse of Malfoy to Dumbledore. It would have been revealed to Harry from that point of the plan to sacrifice Harry to save the Wizarding world. Harry would have been so disgusted with himself and drowned with guilt that he would have found Voldemort himself. Harry would have let Voldemort kill him and when he went into limbo Harry would not have had Dumbledore to encourage him to go back and live. He would have taken the train to go on. It would be up to everyone at Hogwarts to kill Voldemort. Which may or may not have been successful.
I don't know, Kristin. Snape is a man who has been show to act in an a selfish, childish way as though he was not in fact an adult. Maybe it would be like you said. If Snape had always acted like a soldier fighting a war then even if he hated Harry more then ever before, he would know that there is no stopping Voldemort without him. Forgive me again, but you forgot the matter of horcruxes, not all are yet found. Who would find them? So Harry cannot be offed before this is done. Dumbledore doesn't have the time. Snape has to stay by Voldie's side. I guess Harry would see his death as penance and would not come back from the "train station". Maybe the love spell would work anyhow since it did after Lily died? Don't know. Maybe a killer's love is too tainted.
Yes it appears I missed a few important points. The unbreakable vow being the first thing. If Malfoy died and the unbreakable vow was considered broken then both Malfoy and Snape would be dead in the bathroom. To me, I feel as if Harry would think he killed them both. I think he would find someone to help. McGonagall, Madam Pompfrey, or even Dumbledore. I think it would be the first adult he could find/trust. I believe Dumbledore would be in a bit of a bind from that point. Harry would be traumatized more so than seeing Cedric dead. Maybe Harry would think he was just like Voldemort. There's too many paths that could happen to know for sure, but the only way for Harry to win from that point on would be if Dumbledore got to Harry in time. Before Harry did something reckless or stupid. If not then I'm sure Harry would be on the losing end to Voldemort.
Since we know that Snape was a double agent, I always interpreted Dumbledor's death as a previously agreed upon mercy killing between them. Let us not forget that Snape was also in the unenviable position of protecting Harry, as well.
I mean its literally stated in the book as a previously agreed upon mercy killing so thats not just interpreting the situation. Thats literally what happened.
I imagine Ron and Hermione would have been horrified to hear the news, Hermione perhaps even furious, but I have a hard time imagining Dumbledore's reaction
Perhaps they could use the time turner to go back to the boys bathroom scene and Harry just walks by the door instead of going inside. It's not like anyone *living* witnessed Harry casting that spell only crazy Moaning Myrtle. I'm not sure if you can go back in time to save someone if a person died though.
It's always seemed weird to me how Snapes copy of Advanced Potions was even available to students, especially after he was the Potions teacher for so long. Surely he would have noticed it was there and wanted to keep it hidden? Or did he leave it there intentionally?
It wasn't available to anyone: Slughorn gave it out to Harry accidentally. Snape never meant for it to be handed over to students. That's why it wasn't found until Snape taught DADA: when Snape taught potions, he wouldn't have given out his own textbook to a student by accident.
@@l.n.3372 Very true. In the movies it's shown as if it was just another potions book in the cupboard, but I believe Slughorn gave it to Harry in the books
@@lexilovesjesus9129 Slughorn did give it to Harry in the books: it was in a pile of leftover second hand textbooks. Since Harry and Ron didn't buy their own copy yet, Slughorn loaned them 2 copies from the store cupboard. However, Snape never would have made that mistake if he was still teaching potions. It only happened accidentally because Snape moved to DADA and Slughorn didn't know about the Half Blood Prince textbook in the cupboard. Snape probably kept his old book around for recipe tips for his previous NEWT classes, since he always wrote the recipe on the blackboard.
My s/o and I have written an entire story about this situation! It's so interesting to think that Draco could have died at Harry's hand, and to see Harry spiraling downward, thinking he's an evil person, perhaps finding out early that he's got a bit of Voldemort within him.... possibly falling down the path of darkness, like Anakin did.... O M G Y E S P L E A S E.
@@soham4741 what about the time where he also saved harry and not give him away to the death eaters. Or when Harry could not just give him a moment crying in the bathroom, but he didnt
To be fair, I don't think Harry is stupid enough to just stand there until Draco bleeds to death, he'd try to do something. He'd probably run to get help, maybe Dumbledore or Hermione, or if not any other teacher, he'd rather deal with any punishment than let someone die by his hand in such a horrible way. He's lucky Snape was following them though, I think he's the only one who knows the counter spell... On the other hand, Harry was protecting himself as Draco was using the Cruciatus Curse against him, Malfoy is not the innocent victim here!
I think Harry would have been devastated in his own way at the knowledge that he killed Draco, even if it wasn't his intent at the time. Harry may have thought Draco was an arrogant person, but even he wouldn't have wished him dead. In the movie as well as the book, Harry was in shock of what he'd done to Draco. Hermione and Ron would have probably tried to give him as much support as they could, but even they would see Harry in a much darker light after that which would have caused a rift between them in the end I think.
1 thing you missed is that, if Narssica knew Harry killed Draco, she wouldn’t have lied to Voldemort about Harry being dead because she wouldn’t have asked “Draco, is he dead?” And Harry wouldn’t have nodded because he already killed Draco, so the story would not have gone the same way after she had said he was alive.
A small thing and I say small thing that you didn't mention, was the fact that Snape, in his own belief would been next in line to kill Dumbledore, should Draco fail or die before he could complete his task. So, there isn't really a question whether or not, Snape would have killed Dumbledore. It would go straight to the when part.
I think you missed Narcisa's part after Voldemort killed Harry, she wouldn't have lied to Voldemort to save her son. Then again she would've probably escaped after her husband's death.
Draco is the one who let the death eaters into hogwarts in the first place via the vanishing cabinet. He never would have finished fixing it if he died in the duel with Harry so the battle of the astronomy tower arguably wouldn't have happened.
@@emilywayo2413 perhaps, or he would have been killed by snape at a later date to endear him to voldemort regardless. But the death eaters don't sneak into hogwarts if Malfoy dies here which was the whole point of this hypothetical video
If I remember right The Binding promise was something to do with Snape protecting Draco as he performed the task of killing Dumbledore and if Draco was unable to do so then they would step in and kill Dumbledore. If that is accurate than Harry killing Draco would not have notified the curse but instead have left State responsible for killing Dumbledore seeing that Draco was now unable to do so
To be fair snape created the spell so he would’ve been somewhat responsible for Draco dying Edit: the question here is tho, does the vow apply to actions from before it that have consequences later. I realize draco was harmed dearly by the spell and snape was fine, so perhaps not
Snape knew Voldemort couldn't be killed while Harry was still alive due to him being a horcrux. Trying to kill Voldemort at that point, assuming he even succeeded, would have wrecked the plan that Snape and Dumbledore had been building for years. In the best case scenario, Voldemort still wouldn't have fully died, would have gone back into hiding presumably and the whole cycle would have started again. Snape basically had to take one for the team so that the remaining horcruxes (including the one inside Harry) could be destroyed before Voldemort could finally be confronted.
@@GTARanger1992 perhaps but who would kill voldemort in that scenario and if Harry was the owner of the elder wand and voldemort successful killed Harry he would become its true master which would be a major game changer would voldemort have still lost or could he have won
@@vaelegoro7782 well I guess it's a winning the battle but losing the war kinda scenario all his horcruxes are gone and I'm sure he would be paranoid about it til his actual death
Apparently he was a maladictus so perhaps there was some animal language he could use with Sirius. But Sirius said he was able to convey his desires so I guess he kind of showed him and they communicated through signs and different sounds
She probably would keep him alive just to let him feel the guilt more and in the end kill Harry by herself. Otherwise in the forest Voldemort would have just kill stealed.
If he had killed draco, he wouldn't have survived the Forrest, narcissa would have had no reason to pretend him dead and probably would have killed him herself
Honestly hated Draco Malfoy he talked the talk but couldn't walk the walk when Voldemort commanded him to, he should've died in the last book, by a "mudblood" for extra indignity
If Harry had killed Draco, or had gone through with killing Bellatrix after the death of Sirious, would this action have damaged Harry's soul? or would it have loosened the connection between Harry and Voldemort?
most students in the Great Hall wear robes. When Draco enters the Great Hall as Harry is talking to Katie, Draco is wearing a sweater vest - making him stand out from other students in the great hall. The remembrance of Neville longbottom refers to him not wearing robes. Is there any significance to whether students are wearing robes, sweaters, or sweater vests?
I think if Draco died then harry potter would also die because at the last Narcissa asks harry if Draco is alive but if Draco was dead she would not ask and say that harry is alive, harry will be in an impression that Voldemort is still inside him so he will take the killing curse again then he would die and the story would not be good so if Draco lives, harry also lives is this correct?
I dont know why you said it would not alter the story line very much, I think it would change drastically because there would be no Malfoy Heir, but would also change the sight Harry would have in the future.
Why is it never mentioned how Snape’s death spell didn’t kill Dumbledore instantly? He was still alive when he fell off the tower, we see it in his eyes.
1 - It's just a movie. They didn't kill the actor, sheesh! 2 - Actually, this would be actually explained in book 4, when Barty Crouch Jr. explained the unforgivable curses (specifically Avada Kedavra), and later, with crucio. You have to MEAN it. You have to WANT the other person dead for the spell to work - Snape didn't really want to kill Dumbledore, but he was a powerful wizard, who probably had used this curse before, and he managed to create a blast enough to knock Dumbledore off the tower. Simple as that.
Can your next "what if" video be "What if I were magical, and could enter the wizarding world?". I think this video would be interesting and fun since it's more personal :)
Quick question: Lucius’s wand was broken by Voldemort so did he use someone’s wand or get a replacement? Since in the video you said he would try and kill Harry with the killing curse which then Voldemort would kill Lucius. Or would his wand not be broken at all? 2nd Question: Say Harry goes to the forest to be killed since he is a horcrux. When Narcissa notices he is alive would she alert Voldemort since Harry killed Draco (I think so)? If so then Harry would be dead leaving someone else like Neville to kill Voldemort since all horcuxs are destroyed. I think Draco’s death does have a large impact on the rest of the story. As Narcissa’s actions and loyalty put the fate or outcome of the war on edge. And whatever happens at Malfoy Manor could’ve gone in a whole different direction. Also fans would be pissed.
@@denizkenger52, oh...what a fun adventure (sarcasm as it sounds like a horrible loop). But I think this shows how Draco’s life can affect the plot of the story as it affects other characters' actions.
@@megancashatt Harry is protected by his mother’s blood in Voldemort, so as long as Voldemort is alive, Harry is fine, so he still could have defeated voldemort
Malfoy tried to cast a unforgiveable curse so even if the ministery caught harry it wouldve been self defence/ignorance of not knowing the effects of the spell 😜
But, eventually, when Voldemort's soul in Harry would have to be removed by Voldemort performing the Killing Curse on Harry, Narcissa wouldn't vouch for Harry because she wouldn't ask the question "Is Draco safe? Is he in the castle?" because there would be no Draco, and the anger of losing both Lucius and Draco would be enough to let Voldemort know that Harry was alive, so that Voldemort could perform the Killing Curse that this time, would kill Harry.
@@Sharon-pb7so but harry got the wand from draco so if draco was killed by harry then snape would be the true owner of the wand because he would have killed dumbledore and then when voldermort would have killed snape and then he would have been the true owner of the elder wand which would mean that harry would die
what I would say is more segnificant is that (atleast in the movie, sadly have not much knowledge of the books after goblet of fire) Narcissa was the one who checked if Harry was still alive after Voldemort "killed" him. She lied because, if I remember correctly, firstly because the Malfoy's were not feeling quite happy with voldemort being alive and because Harry saved Draco in the Room of Requirement. In this hypothetical world she would probably tell that he is allive, filled with grief about her son and her husband.
The other question: would Tom Riddle become really evil and made horcruxes if he didn't unintentionally killed Myrtle? It's easier to become a murder when you already killed someone (though not with his own hands but still). I think that was the crucial point turning him into Voldemort. Like there was no return anyway.
this could have far bigger implications then you realize , Harry feeding the Voldemort horcrux part of himself tainting him more then what a single kill should impowering the link and messing with his mind to the point Harry might join Voldemort
Correction: Katie Bell is NOT Draco's or even Harry's classmate. First of all, she is in Gryffindor, not Slytherin, so she can't be classmates with Draco. Second of all, she is said to be one year older than Harry and Draco.
I don't agree that Snape's sole reason for killing Dumbledore was to save Draco, however. Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him - a terrible thing to ask of anyone but something he would have trusted Snape to do. The effect on Snape of deliberately killing someone is an interesting aside, as I am not sure he ever deliberately did away with anyone in his years of spying. He seemed to be more of an information man.
If, as it appears in the movies, killing Dumbledore and protecting Draco were separate clauses, I feel the contract would go on. Snape would still have to kill Dumbledore to, not only "prove his loyalty", but also because he will die from the contract if he doesn't. I love the theory.
I think you missed something big in the story, cause if Narsissa would know that Harry killed Draco, she wouldn't have said in the forest that he was dead (in the deathly hallows part 2), but she would have said that he was alive or she would have killed him. Right??
Two questions: 1) Would Harry using Sectum Sempra have broken a piece of Harry's soul away from him like Avada Kadavara does? and 2) How would Draco's death affect Harry... I doubt that Harry actually intended to KILL him. Hurt him yes, but kill him? I don't think that was his intent.
Dumbledore knows everything? Yeah, long after the facts, otherwise his students wouldn't be constantly in mortal danger or being tortured by a teacher.
Yeah, the unbreakable vow was first night to protect Malfoy to the best of his capabilities. How can he protect somebody if he's not there to protect them? I think this would have vetoed the unbreakable vow. It basically means if you are in the vicinity and you can do something to save Draco you do it regardless of who is around. But like I just said if you're not there then you can't witness it. You would have no knowledge that the person was ever in any danger, so I think that would be like the one loophole and the unbreakable vow
Great video! I’ve been thinking since I saw the movie in the cinema, how is it possible that Harry was not expelled from the school for attacking other student and almost killing him?
If Snapes Motivation was to safe the son of his former love, well, I would say there is a high chance he'd think enough is enough, when he sees that son actually murdering someone
One thing I overlooked is the whole wand ownership thing. My thoughts surrounding that are: Snape would kill Dumbledore without him ever being disarmed by Draco (making him the rightful owner). However, Snape himself would later be disarmed by Harry during their confrontation after the death of Dumbledore. This would ensure that Voldemort, after killing Snape, still wouldn't be the true owner of the elder wand.
I agree!
Wow 😳
Agreed
This video was actually super interesting. I loved it! It had so many consequences and you analyzed them so well and presented it all soo interesting! I watched with my eyes closed and it felt like I was in a movie.
I wonder, since Dumbledore would've let Snape disarm kill him, would the wand still change allegiance or would it have known that it wasn't truly earned since it could feel its master holding back?
Harry killed a student?
Dumbledore: 100 points to Gryffindor!
lol
lmao
But only if it was a Slytherin.
Pottah kills slytherin
take an extra thousand points
LOL
If this happened, who would have checked Harry's body in the forbiden forest? If it was still Narssica, Harry would have definitly died, and Voldemort would have won
Harry can't die as long as Voldemort lives cause he's got a piece of him inside Voldemort when he took his blood to regain a body. Wouldve been an infinite loops of Avada Kedavra and going back to life
@@dank_memes_101 I doubt even Lucius could kill Harry, because the magic that bind Harry and Voldemort.
Harry could become Voldemort's immortal prisoner, tortured for eternity
@@dank_memes_101 no he would've killed that part of him inside Harry with that spell the first time like in the movies, leaving Harry vulnerable
Draco wouldnt be in malfoy manor to stall for Harry after Hermione blew his face up
Voldemort would try to kill harry again but he would lose his body due to the fact that the Avada Kedavra spell would rebound onto him, due to Harry being the master of the Eldert Wand. So Then Voldemort would be still alive but with no body, at least until Nagini is destroyed.
Worst case scenario is Harry getting expelled and becoming a Games Keeper.
I mean not so bad cuz he can be with hagrid
Or he may have been sent to Azkaban with a murder of Draco.
With the entire wizarding community believing him to be the one who defeats Voldemort, Harry would not be sent to Azkaban or expelled from the school, but would be infamous for killing a fellow student
he would carry haggord's bag
Harry becoming Hagrid's assistant and moving around Hogwarts carrying hagrid's bags😂
The girl’s bathroom:
“Do you think Ron likes me?”
The boy’s bathroom:
At the Headquarters of the Order:
"I wonder what Dumbledore is doing right now to stop Voldemort"
*Dumbledore drinking vodka in his office, singing 'Odo the Hero' while the former Headmasters in the paintings hold their ears*
@@emankcin1701 😂😂😂😂
remember hermione once nearly got killed by a troll in the girls bathroom
*Or literally any bathroom*
@@emankcin1701 lmfao 🤣
Harry killing classmates out of suspicion would have certainly shook the loyalty of some people, especially not the ones really close to him if they ever found out. And there's no guarantee that it would stay a secret after the 6th part since Voldemort controlled the press
To be fair, Harry was acting in self defense when he used Septum Sempra on Draco so it's not like he just used it on Draco as soon as he heard him crying and talking to Myrtle.
I thought Voldemort looked like Rupert Murdoch.
@@tempestfennac9687 Not really, by the english laws he could be accused of vigilantism and using excessive force in self defence (and after all, if you look at their former history you can call harry obsessed with draco), not to mention torture and cruelty since that spell slowly bleeds out the target, and I doubt that in court the excuse I didn't know what that spell do would hold, after all to use a spell you have to know it and how to cast it, unless Dumbledore manages somehow to cover it up (the murder of the only heir of a prominent wizengamot and sacred 28th family? We are not talking of someone like moaning Myrtle, between her and draco the difference could be similar to the one between Tom the elderly shop owner at the end of the road and a member of the royal family, and they almost closed Hogwarts for her death) I don't really like Harry 's chances
@@88atahualpa I agree those would be issues (I was responding to the comment Blue made about Harry's motives for using the spell on Draco). I'd assume murder would get life imprisonment in Azkaban but I don't know how the Wizarding world would see self defense like this (especially since they could, if they were inclined to use it, verify that Draco was going for a Crucio when Harry cut him).
draco tried to use the cruciatus curse on him
The only thing that I could see going differently is Belatrix being the one to ask Voldemort to determine if Harry did kill Draco. Lucius was not on Voldemorts good side at this point so I'm skeptical Voldemort would've granted him this favor. Belatrix however was his top Death Eater and likely could've used that to ask for Voldemorts help on her sister's behalf
Agreed...
i don't think Bellatrix would've cared too much about Draco dying. she only taught him Occlumency to help him with the task of killing Dumbledore, not because she cared for him in any way (although it is possible she did so on Narcissa's request).
@@JuanMataCFC
Bellatrix also taught Draco Occlumency to screw over Snape, since Bellatrix didn't want Snape "stealing all of the glory" to replace her as Voldemort's favorite. Bellatrix is definitely selfishly motivated when it comes to helping anyone.
Also Lucius was in Azkaban in that time.
@@l.n.3372 she did felt something for her sister though. So she could do it for Narcissa.
Narsisa telling Voldemort that Harry is dead after there first confrontation. I think that is a little bit important. So Harry never left the Frobiden forest alive.
it's actually the second confrontation. Draco (despite recognizing him) refusing to give Harry up after the trio were brought to Malfoy Manor by Snatchers is the first.
Actually he would have. He was in possession of the Hallows and his mothers love was inside Voldemort, which keeps Harry alive.
@@lexilovesjesus9129 Hallows did not have that power. Dumbledore himself said that it wasn't gift from death but just powerfull objects from powerfull wizards. There is no prove that they have the power. Only reason he stayed alive was becouse Voldemort took his blood so Harry cannot die before Voldemort.
@@JustSomeSlavicBoy I'm pretty sure after the scene in the forest, the protection was nullified. Every part of Harry except for Voldemort's soul was protected by the blood in Voldemort. From what Harry said in the final chapter, it implied that neither of them had any magical protections and that the only remaining factor was the Elder Wand. Here's why I believe this: If the protection had indeed continued the same way it had after Voldemort's initial encounter with Harry, protecting him till he was 17 as long as he considered the Dursley's place home, then Voldemort would've suffered the same fate he did the first time. He wouldve gone back to the state of being less than human only able to possess others. And that didnt happen. Voldemort was very much still standing and alive after he used the Killing Curse on Harry.
After the forest scene, Harry did not have the protection of his mother. In fact he did the same thing for the remaining survivors by sacrificing himself for them. The only reason Voldemort finally lost to Harry is because of the Elder Wand.
Therefore, if Narcissa didnt lie to Voldemort about Harry being dead, Voldemort then kills him. Or more likely, in this scenario, as she wants revenge, she kills him herself quietly, and then tells Voldemort he is dead.
He was always alive, even if someone else checked. If Voldemort would've hit him with the killing curse again,he would've met with the same fate he did 17 years ago,because as long as Voldemort has Harry's blood he cannot kill him
Defining “protect Draco from harm” is definitely important. Imagine if he got the Hogwarts equivalent to a paper cut, or tripped and broke his nose, or got hurt playing Quidditch.
My father will hear about this!
She also says "Will you do all in your power..." so no vow would be broken if he can't do anything.
Lucius Malfoy was in Azkaban so no one in power would have cared that Draco was killed besides Harry-haters like Umbridge and Harry's friends and teachers. Dumbledore wouldn't have let a murder divert Harry from his main task of murdering Voldemort, no matter how much he disliked Harry after this.
Well that's the reason the malfoy aren't in gryffindor there just words never any action to prove their claim. I mean lucius didn't bother to care when Draco was transformed into an animal by moody.I think Draco naive to think that his father could save I wish someone wouls slap him to reality.
*Would
When you first talked about this spell I immediately started wondering this. You read my mind!
I can't read a spell without shouting it like they do in the movies. I have no control over this reaction. I'm not embarrassed.
Harry Potter Theory be like: Legilimens 😂😂
@@aarjavjain1379 😂😂
Yeah maybe not that one
@@MsKatieMD same here we in this together
A quick request:
How does the Wizarding Economy work? Do people have to pay tax to the Ministry of Magic? Is that how they pay the ministry employees and Hogwarts professors or the headmaster?
How does Gringotts work? I mean, you deposit whatever you have in your vaults. So is that free of cost? Or the goblins use the gold for investment purposes? But it does sound unlikely that goblins would draw money out of the vaults for investment purposes? What do they do that for? Wizarding economy spins my head to be honest.
That would be intresting
They just make more gold using the stone ;)
I’ve always seen it as the ministry just uses magic to duplicate the money (like the curse that was on bellatrix’s vault, I don’t remember the name of it), but they do it to only a reasonable extent to prevent inflation and to pay the minister employees.
Who mints the money? Who, actually has that great economical and political power?
@@RobertFerro3 that isn't how an economy works. If you mint money without keeping any gold reserves, you'll get a hell of an inflation.
Duplicating money doesn't make sense. Do you even know how much money they have to duplicate for that purpose? That'll be a hyper inflation worse than Germany's in 1920s.
Plus, you can't duplicate money, seeing as you can't create gold or something like that. Gold, silver and the copper used to make Knuts stand as an exception to Gamp's Law of Elementary Transfiguration. The only exception is Philosopher's stone, and there's a reason why Nicholas Flamel keeps it safe.
And let's not forget that in the Wizarding World, there aren't many professions, at least compared to the the muggle world. And it's safe to assume that most people work under Ministry, or at least strive to work there.
I love that you edit Harry's eyes back to his original eye color
I like it as well.
WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT?!
@@boopityb00p Why not to say that?
@@boopityb00pbecause if you read the books Harry had green eyes like his mom while Daniel Radcliffe had blue eyes in the movies
Yea if Harry ended up killing Draco by accident due to this, it would have been a disaster for so many reasons. Even with it not being intentional, Harry would still have to deal with the immense guilt, and the same for Snape. I agree that Snape would not have died from the vow due to the "protecting to the best of his ability" part, but he would still have to add another person he was partially responsible for killing who he cared about to his psyche. It was due to a spell he created that another student found and unknowingly used. Even though Snape didn't directly or purposefully kill Draco, he would still have some moral responsibility in this scenario. I didn't think about what Snape would do with Harry, but him covering it up would actually make sense. His life would be in danger otherwise ,and he would have to protect the one out of the two boys left he swore to protect. It would make the Harry/Snape relationship even more complicated.
7:37 Of course Voldemort would kill Lucius if he tried to kill Harry. When it comes to Harry, Voldemort has the “Nobody kills you but me” mindset.
@Jackerson Roze 😂😂🙃😂
@Jackerson Roze aw yeah! XD
Bella: I've got Potter! Avada-
Voldy: DON'T! Don't hurt him! Only I can..."
Harry: omg u guys 😂😂
That no nosed tsundere, Voldemort.
What if Sirius proved his innocence in prisoner of askaban or people believed him that Peter was the traitor
YES
Great idea
I mean I still doesn't understand why he wasn't proofed innocent. All three kids new it, lupin knew it and even Dumbledore knew it resulting in Snape (probably) believing it. A statement by thenm all should had proved thie truth or not?
@Mr Doctors13 (sry if wrong, it has been years since I read the books). But why didn't Snape believed it. Did he question Dumbledores decision-making?(this question is maybe easy because the ministry is pretty ignorant) but why did they believed earlier that Sirius killed Pettigrew and the muggles by less evidence
@@ichbinzwardummaber They don't have evidence. If they had Peter then the Ministry would believe, they don't take memories into consideration. Snape heard Lupin saying that he betrayed Dumbledore throughout the year, so he didn't believe them at all.
I believed that if Draco had died of the sectemsempra curse, Severus would be freed from that portion of the unbreakable vow, because the vow was worded as "...to the best of my ability I will protect Draco." This would mean that Severus had not arrived in time to cast the countercurse to save his godson.
Dracos godfather was Snape?
@@lexilovesjesus9129 It's not said outright in either the books or the movies. However, the closeness of their relationship, coupled with the likelihood that Lucius was a semi-mentor to Severus during their own school years, mean that it was heavily implied. The idea just makes sense. (11/2/2021)
Voldamort trying to sleep, wakes up to harry in his mind: "I killed your assassin, and had it blamed on you. Good luck with the Malfoy family."
I think one vital moment you did not address is narcissus lying to Voldemort when she confirms Harry’s death. If he was the one to have killed her son, there’s no way she would have covered for Harry like she did in the story.
I think they could have easily covered up his death by outing his previous attempts at Dumbledore's life, and explaining "sectum sempra" away as another assassination attempt gone awry. They could say he was dabbling with dark magic that he didn't quite understand in order to kill Dumbledore, and this time the dark magic backfired on him and cost him his life.
Dracos mother less we forget lied to voldamore in the forest bc Harry told her her son was still alive. In this case she wouldn’t have lied which leads me to believe Harry would be killed this time since the holcrox in him was destroyed
Harry didn't not die because of the Horcrux though, but because of Lily Potters Love-Protection that is bound in Harry blood (Voldemort then used that same blood to be "revived" so that protection spell is kept, aslong as Voldemort lives)
@@eberlix Correct 420 points to 69
What about the scene with Harry and Narcisus in the woods. Wouldn't she have said that harry was alive and Voldimort kill him a second time?
But Harry would still be alive and Voldemort would be so confused lol
@@az1202 and give a chance to put on the cloak and escape lol
Harry can't be killed by voldimort because his mother's blood runs through him
@@scottymcmacc4888 ya
@@scottymcmacc4888 Which was nullified in "Goblet of Fire" during the ritual at the graveyard, you know, that whole thing about Voldimort being able to touch Harry.
It was today, June
4th, that the golden trio went through the trapdoor and stopped Voldemort from getting the Philosopher’s Stone.
Aww! Congrats tiny golden trio!
Hmmmmm.I think it would change greatly. I mean if Harry killed draco. When Harry is caught by snatchers and taken to the malfoys. Draco couldn't stall n say he wasn't sure. Or even if the malfoys found out Harry killed draco when Harry sacrificed himself to die in the forest to voldemort. narcissa defo would not of lied n Harry would of been killed again by her. I believe that if Harry had killed Draco with that spell Harry would of been killed and Lord voldemort would of had no horcruxs left so could of been killed in the end by neville Longbottom but Harry most definitely would be dead imo.
Dear friend, please refrain from using "could/would/should/might/... of". That doesn't exist. What you mean is "could/would/should/might/... have". Thank you.
OK grammar police. My opinion Is still the same so you do you phil kab x
@@todlless50 That's the spirit
Voldemort can't kill Harry because of Lily's protection because Voldemort took his blood
I don't think Snape would have worked with Harry to cover it up. I think Dumbledore would have worked to cover it up, and a Snape would have, begrudgingly, gone alone with it.
Yeah Snape despised Harry and would probably try to get him expelled or worse sent to Azkaban
@@TheAlphatitan I agree, Snape hates Harry and would never work willingly with him.
@@cornwallcrafter8410 But he did originally, not like he went and told everyone outloud that he did a mortal spell, they just left.
Snape would have been killed due to the unbreakable vow he made. One of the promises was to protect Draco from harm.
@@TheAlphatitan while i don't think Snape would've willingly covered for Harry, i also don't think he would've tried to get Harry expelled. yes Snape gave Harry numerous detentions throughout his Hogwarts time, but he always knew he had to keep Harry safe. i feel like Dumbledore told Snape he could treat Harry as badly as he wanted to as long as he protected him from any kind of danger (including being expelled).
Question I've been asking myself for a long time (it's actually 2 but both are related to the same topic in HP);
1)Did in the time of colonization, the ministries of magic in the UK, France etc. control the colonies as well? Did they control it in a governor-style? For example- who did control India until 1948?
2)When there was major war in the muggle world (WW1, WW2, the cold war), were the representative ministries of magic in conflict as well? For example- did during the cold war, did MACUSA and the soviet ministry were in conflict?
They briefly touch upon the second point in The Crimes of Grindelwald
@@lucasiglesias1894 really?how?
@@oopharb7237 Grindelwald predicts WWII, shows it to several wizards which prompts them to join him. Arguably his idea of wizards domination over muggles stems from his views on how barbaric they've become and how that could affect the wizard community.
so, he wants to stop the holocaust? And they're try'na stop him from stopping the holocaust?? That's heavy.
@@riverskipworth2657
Who is "he"?
Bro your way of speaking just gives me chills
Love ur videos ❤️❤️
Video idea: What if Dumbledore had been minister of magic and not headmaster?
One thing that this would affect is Harry and Ginnys relationship. After that Ginny probably wouldn’t want to date Harry because he killed Draco. Or maybe she would overlook it as an accident. No idea.
I think something similiar would apply to James P. and Lily P., would she marry the guy that bullied her childhood friend, if she knew about it? And how would Ginny find out it was Harry, if everyone blames Voldemort?
@@eberlix I don’t feel like Harry would accept that
@@eberlix What do you mean "if she knew about it?" She was the one who defended Snape in that one memory.
@@Lollaksyotuube oh well, didn't realise that's Lily, mb.
@@eberlix Its ok.
I love these theories! They go so in depth and go into details I didn’t even notice!
I agree that snape wouldn't die from the vow had Draco died in a way he couldn't prevent, however doing Draco's task of killing Dumbledore would still be active since the vow was snape would have to do it if Draco was unable to do so.
You forgot something important, if Draco died there Snape would have become the true owner of the Elder Wand by Killing dumbledore. Wich means that Voldemort actually could be the true owner in the end. And that maybe could change the end of it all.
No, snape would'e died due to breaking his unbreakable vow
@@Enderjuusto1 not exactly... he vowed to protect Draco to the best of his ability. But if Harry used sectumsempra and Snape was not made aware of it or could not be there in time to deliver the counter curse he would still survive because he worked off of the information he had at the time. its a loophole in the vow. If he had said he will protect Draco no matter what. then yeah he would be dead
@@kimmyc247
But you forget another loophole: to the best of his ability. If Snape knew beforehand that Harry had the Half Blood Prince textbook and Snape did nothing about it, then that violated the "best of Snape's ability" part of the Unbreakable Vow. And Snape did know about the textbook once Slughorn praised Harry's potion making skills: Snape easily could have deduced beforehand that Harry had the textbook when Slughorn was boasting about Harry's amazing potions skills at the Slug Club Christmas party in December. So, Snape was kinda negligent if he never confiscated the textbook from Harry at any point afterwards. Thus, it really wasn't to the best of Snape's ability at all.
@@l.n.3372 like I said. if he was aware of it. But from what I remember. Snape wasn't aware of it until after Harry used his spell on Draco. So again it does come into a loophole of its own.
@@kimmyc247
Yes, it all depends on when Snape found out that Harry had the textbook. But your argument is under the possibility false assumption that Snape didn't know the truth until Sectumsempra. My argument is the opposite: Snape easily could have known months in advance and he still did nothing to prevent it.
I think that Snape was aware of it for months beforehand. We even see at the Christmas party how suspicious Snape was after Slughorn was boasting. If Snape was suspicious and did nothing to confiscate the textbook, he's negligent and at fault, and thus broke the Unbreakable Vow. He only didn't die because he saved Draco's life immediately, but that was pure luck that he was nearby when moaning Myrtle was yelling about murder in the bathroom.
I don't think Lucius would dare ask Voldemort to procure evidence of Harry killing Draco. All Deatheaters were scared shitless to even ask the Dark Lord for a breathmint. And I don’t think Voldy would agree either. What would he get out of it?
Doenst matter its actually that he would do it just so he can let Lucius suffer the fact that he knows who the killer is but can't do anything about it.
Would his heart become less pure because killing rips the soul?
@@denizkenger52 Unintentionally or not, he meant to harm Draco so he was far from innocent. I believe it would have stayed with him forever, I can't believe you really forget who you kill
I dont think ripping soul works like that. Because Harry did not know Sectumsempra's effect. He did not send it for killing. Also even if he sent it to killing, purpose is important. Righteous causes (like revenge) wont work like getting pleasure from murdering.
When Voldy killed Harrys Mom, he accidentaly produced a Horcrux, right? Maybe Harry would have produced a Horcrux by killing Malfoy? The only living thing around would probably be Snape... Imagine Snape being Harrys Horcrux 😅
I don't really believe that this would happen but the Idea is kinda funny
It's hard to tell what the exact rules for the soul ripping are. Remorse fixes it. Harry would ahve that so if it did fracture, it would repair eventually. However, I'm not sure it would have cracked in the first place because it was not intentional so not technically murder. We hypothesized the same for Snape killing Dumbledore because Dumbledore asked Snape to do it, so his soul would likely be unfractured. Granted, in theory if commiting murder breaks your soul in this world, then all bad deeds would do some sort of damage, so harry would likely have some sort of more serious issue with his soul after this. I would think it would heal, though.
Voldemort would have came to power if Malfoy was killed by Harry. If Malfoy died, Severus wouldn't have helped Harry. He would have seen him as his father James Potter. He would have taken Harry and the corpse of Malfoy to Dumbledore. It would have been revealed to Harry from that point of the plan to sacrifice Harry to save the Wizarding world. Harry would have been so disgusted with himself and drowned with guilt that he would have found Voldemort himself. Harry would have let Voldemort kill him and when he went into limbo Harry would not have had Dumbledore to encourage him to go back and live. He would have taken the train to go on. It would be up to everyone at Hogwarts to kill Voldemort. Which may or may not have been successful.
@Greg & Forge *Snape
*ah yes, mass murder*
I don't know, Kristin. Snape is a man who has been show to act in an a selfish, childish way as though he was not in fact an adult. Maybe it would be like you said. If Snape had always acted like a soldier fighting a war then even if he hated Harry more then ever before, he would know that there is no stopping Voldemort without him. Forgive me again, but you forgot the matter of horcruxes, not all are yet found. Who would find them? So Harry cannot be offed before this is done. Dumbledore doesn't have the time. Snape has to stay by Voldie's side. I guess Harry would see his death as penance and would not come back from the "train station". Maybe the love spell would work anyhow since it did after Lily died? Don't know. Maybe a killer's love is too tainted.
Yes it appears I missed a few important points. The unbreakable vow being the first thing. If Malfoy died and the unbreakable vow was considered broken then both Malfoy and Snape would be dead in the bathroom. To me, I feel as if Harry would think he killed them both. I think he would find someone to help. McGonagall, Madam Pompfrey, or even Dumbledore. I think it would be the first adult he could find/trust. I believe Dumbledore would be in a bit of a bind from that point. Harry would be traumatized more so than seeing Cedric dead. Maybe Harry would think he was just like Voldemort. There's too many paths that could happen to know for sure, but the only way for Harry to win from that point on would be if Dumbledore got to Harry in time. Before Harry did something reckless or stupid. If not then I'm sure Harry would be on the losing end to Voldemort.
Since we know that Snape was a double agent, I always interpreted Dumbledor's death as a previously agreed upon mercy killing between them. Let us not forget that Snape was also in the unenviable position of protecting Harry, as well.
No need to interpret, he straight tells Snape he’d need to kill him if Draco can’t do it lol
I mean its literally stated in the book as a previously agreed upon mercy killing so thats not just interpreting the situation. Thats literally what happened.
I imagine Ron and Hermione would have been horrified to hear the news, Hermione perhaps even furious, but I have a hard time imagining Dumbledore's reaction
Perhaps they could use the time turner to go back to the boys bathroom scene and Harry just walks by the door instead of going inside. It's not like anyone *living* witnessed Harry casting that spell only crazy Moaning Myrtle. I'm not sure if you can go back in time to save someone if a person died though.
It's always seemed weird to me how Snapes copy of Advanced Potions was even available to students, especially after he was the Potions teacher for so long. Surely he would have noticed it was there and wanted to keep it hidden? Or did he leave it there intentionally?
Interesting! Yeah what about other teachers potions books?
It wasn't available to anyone: Slughorn gave it out to Harry accidentally. Snape never meant for it to be handed over to students. That's why it wasn't found until Snape taught DADA: when Snape taught potions, he wouldn't have given out his own textbook to a student by accident.
@@l.n.3372 Very true. In the movies it's shown as if it was just another potions book in the cupboard, but I believe Slughorn gave it to Harry in the books
@@lexilovesjesus9129
Slughorn did give it to Harry in the books: it was in a pile of leftover second hand textbooks. Since Harry and Ron didn't buy their own copy yet, Slughorn loaned them 2 copies from the store cupboard. However, Snape never would have made that mistake if he was still teaching potions. It only happened accidentally because Snape moved to DADA and Slughorn didn't know about the Half Blood Prince textbook in the cupboard. Snape probably kept his old book around for recipe tips for his previous NEWT classes, since he always wrote the recipe on the blackboard.
@@l.n.3372 Oh! Yeah you're right, mate
Imagine if Harry tested sectumsempre on Ron in bed, like he did with levicorpus. That would be funney.
Ron's last words as he sees his blood spill is "Bloody Hell"
I don't know if I should like this cause its true but OMG...
Well the spell was at least marked "for enemies" (at least in the movies, Idr if it was marked in the books)
@@nolansnichenook I read Half-Blood Prince a few months ago. As I recall, it was marked "for enemies" in the book, too.
It said for enemies
Draco in heaven: 'my father will hear about this!'
lol
If Draco got into a fistfight with a girl and lost, he won’t whine to his dad. Draco would be too ashamed.
@@Wellch true
5:17 isn't another part of their vow that Snape would have to finish the task the Dark Lord gave Draco if he was unable to do so?
My s/o and I have written an entire story about this situation! It's so interesting to think that Draco could have died at Harry's hand, and to see Harry spiraling downward, thinking he's an evil person, perhaps finding out early that he's got a bit of Voldemort within him.... possibly falling down the path of darkness, like Anakin did.... O M G Y E S P L E A S E.
Poor Draco, to me he’s not the boy who made bad decisions, he’s the boy who had no choice’s at all
Yeah well, what about the part where he tried to torture Harry with crucio?
@@soham4741 what about the time where he also saved harry and not give him away to the death eaters. Or when Harry could not just give him a moment crying in the bathroom, but he didnt
To be fair, I don't think Harry is stupid enough to just stand there until Draco bleeds to death, he'd try to do something. He'd probably run to get help, maybe Dumbledore or Hermione, or if not any other teacher, he'd rather deal with any punishment than let someone die by his hand in such a horrible way. He's lucky Snape was following them though, I think he's the only one who knows the counter spell... On the other hand, Harry was protecting himself as Draco was using the Cruciatus Curse against him, Malfoy is not the innocent victim here!
I think Harry would have been devastated in his own way at the knowledge that he killed Draco, even if it wasn't his intent at the time. Harry may have thought Draco was an arrogant person, but even he wouldn't have wished him dead. In the movie as well as the book, Harry was in shock of what he'd done to Draco.
Hermione and Ron would have probably tried to give him as much support as they could, but even they would see Harry in a much darker light after that which would have caused a rift between them in the end I think.
I love his soothing voice.
1 thing you missed is that, if Narssica knew Harry killed Draco, she wouldn’t have lied to Voldemort about Harry being dead because she wouldn’t have asked “Draco, is he dead?” And Harry wouldn’t have nodded because he already killed Draco, so the story would not have gone the same way after she had said he was alive.
A small thing and I say small thing that you didn't mention, was the fact that Snape, in his own belief would been next in line to kill Dumbledore, should Draco fail or die before he could complete his task. So, there isn't really a question whether or not, Snape would have killed Dumbledore. It would go straight to the when part.
I think you missed Narcisa's part after Voldemort killed Harry, she wouldn't have lied to Voldemort to save her son. Then again she would've probably escaped after her husband's death.
Well then somebody else would have checked his body and still revealed he was alive.
@@JarJarBricks01 exactly
Draco is the one who let the death eaters into hogwarts in the first place via the vanishing cabinet. He never would have finished fixing it if he died in the duel with Harry so the battle of the astronomy tower arguably wouldn't have happened.
so dumbledore would have died of poising
@@emilywayo2413 perhaps, or he would have been killed by snape at a later date to endear him to voldemort regardless. But the death eaters don't sneak into hogwarts if Malfoy dies here which was the whole point of this hypothetical video
You Sir, are a master legilimens. I was just thinking this a few days ago whilst listening to the last few chapters of HBP book on audible.
If I remember right The Binding promise was something to do with Snape protecting Draco as he performed the task of killing Dumbledore and if Draco was unable to do so then they would step in and kill Dumbledore. If that is accurate than Harry killing Draco would not have notified the curse but instead have left State responsible for killing Dumbledore seeing that Draco was now unable to do so
To be fair snape created the spell so he would’ve been somewhat responsible for Draco dying
Edit: the question here is tho, does the vow apply to actions from before it that have consequences later. I realize draco was harmed dearly by the spell and snape was fine, so perhaps not
Why didn’t Snape use Septumsempra on Voldemort when he knew he was about to kill him?
Snape knew Voldemort couldn't be killed while Harry was still alive due to him being a horcrux.
Trying to kill Voldemort at that point, assuming he even succeeded, would have wrecked the plan that Snape and Dumbledore had been building for years. In the best case scenario, Voldemort still wouldn't have fully died, would have gone back into hiding presumably and the whole cycle would have started again.
Snape basically had to take one for the team so that the remaining horcruxes (including the one inside Harry) could be destroyed before Voldemort could finally be confronted.
What if Harry decided to stay dead when voldemort used the killing curse in the Forrest?
Yo I need to see that video
Wouldn't Neville still kill nagini and then Voldemort is still vulnerable to death whether harry is alive or not
@@GTARanger1992 perhaps but who would kill voldemort in that scenario and if Harry was the owner of the elder wand and voldemort successful killed Harry he would become its true master which would be a major game changer would voldemort have still lost or could he have won
@@vaelegoro7782 well I guess it's a winning the battle but losing the war kinda scenario all his horcruxes are gone and I'm sure he would be paranoid about it til his actual death
@@GTARanger1992 Maybe but there are alot of other ways the scenario could go which is why I think it'd be an interesting video topic
Wow chain reaction. Harry ends Malfoy which due to the unbreakable vow ends Snape. We call that killing 2 birds with one stone, mate
Sectumsempra is wicked, really a nasty curse Snape cooked up. Was literally watching HBP yesterday!
I will not miss a single HP theory video!!!
Have you guys done a theory on Crookshanks? It says Crookshanks could talk to Serius in the Prisoner of Azkaban, but how?
Apparently he was a maladictus so perhaps there was some animal language he could use with Sirius. But Sirius said he was able to convey his desires so I guess he kind of showed him and they communicated through signs and different sounds
Animagi being able to speak to animals while transformed kinda makes sense though.
5:53 that is not true Snape killed Dumbledore becouse they needed the dark lord to fully trust him.
Imagine if this happened then in deathly hallows narcissa gives up Harry to Voldemort saying he's alive 😬😬😬
She probably would keep him alive just to let him feel the guilt more and in the end kill Harry by herself. Otherwise in the forest Voldemort would have just kill stealed.
She would have said someone else to do that and they would have said s
He is alive
Harry still would've survived. Voldemort had Harry's mothers protection inside him that kept Harry alive
If he had killed draco, he wouldn't have survived the Forrest, narcissa would have had no reason to pretend him dead and probably would have killed him herself
Its literally 0.25 am and i have school 7.50 tomorrow. But still watching cause i am just addicted to these videos.
Your videos always keep me hooked, and I’m trying to read the Harry Potter books (again) at the same time! Great videos!
Harry with Sectumsempra is me after learning a big word and trying to use it every chance I get.
Honestly hated Draco Malfoy he talked the talk but couldn't walk the walk when Voldemort commanded him to, he should've died in the last book, by a "mudblood" for extra indignity
If Harry had killed Draco, or had gone through with killing Bellatrix after the death of Sirious, would this action have damaged Harry's soul? or would it have loosened the connection between Harry and Voldemort?
No. Because Beatrix definitely had ill intentions.
most students in the Great Hall wear robes. When Draco enters the Great Hall as Harry is talking to Katie, Draco is wearing a sweater vest - making him stand out from other students in the great hall. The remembrance of Neville longbottom refers to him not wearing robes. Is there any significance to whether students are wearing robes, sweaters, or sweater vests?
This is what I've been waiting foooooor
I swear sectumsepera was used by Harry in the chamber of secrets in the dual between him and draco
I think if Draco died then harry potter would also die because at the last Narcissa asks harry if Draco is alive but if Draco was dead she would not ask and say that harry is alive, harry will be in an impression that Voldemort is still inside him so he will take the killing curse again then he would die and the story would not be good so if Draco lives, harry also lives
is this correct?
I dont know why you said it would not alter the story line very much, I think it would change drastically because there would be no Malfoy Heir, but would also change the sight Harry would have in the future.
Wouldn't that make Snape the master of the elder Wand and eventually voldemort, meaning he'd be able to kill Harry?
Half blood prince will always be one of my favourite HP movies and it’s the best of Tom Felton’s acting
Why is it never mentioned how Snape’s death spell didn’t kill Dumbledore instantly? He was still alive when he fell off the tower, we see it in his eyes.
1 - It's just a movie. They didn't kill the actor, sheesh!
2 - Actually, this would be actually explained in book 4, when Barty Crouch Jr. explained the unforgivable curses (specifically Avada Kedavra), and later, with crucio. You have to MEAN it. You have to WANT the other person dead for the spell to work - Snape didn't really want to kill Dumbledore, but he was a powerful wizard, who probably had used this curse before, and he managed to create a blast enough to knock Dumbledore off the tower. Simple as that.
@@FraternityOfShadows I suppose.
I love these videos!! ❤️
Can your next "what if" video be "What if I were magical, and could enter the wizarding world?". I think this video would be interesting and fun since it's more personal :)
Video Starts 4:00
Quick question: Lucius’s wand was broken by Voldemort so did he use someone’s wand or get a replacement? Since in the video you said he would try and kill Harry with the killing curse which then Voldemort would kill Lucius. Or would his wand not be broken at all?
2nd Question: Say Harry goes to the forest to be killed since he is a horcrux. When Narcissa notices he is alive would she alert Voldemort since Harry killed Draco (I think so)? If so then Harry would be dead leaving someone else like Neville to kill Voldemort since all horcuxs are destroyed.
I think Draco’s death does have a large impact on the rest of the story. As Narcissa’s actions and loyalty put the fate or outcome of the war on edge. And whatever happens at Malfoy Manor could’ve gone in a whole different direction. Also fans would be pissed.
@@denizkenger52, oh...what a fun adventure (sarcasm as it sounds like a horrible loop). But I think this shows how Draco’s life can affect the plot of the story as it affects other characters' actions.
@@megancashatt Harry is protected by his mother’s blood in Voldemort, so as long as Voldemort is alive, Harry is fine, so he still could have defeated voldemort
@@az1202, oh yeah your right. After the video, my just had a bunch of questions.😂
Oh, boy! A what-if scenario!
...HEY! What's going on with them UA-cam captions?
Malfoy tried to cast a unforgiveable curse so even if the ministery caught harry it wouldve been self defence/ignorance of not knowing the effects of the spell 😜
But, eventually, when Voldemort's soul in Harry would have to be removed by Voldemort performing the Killing Curse on Harry, Narcissa wouldn't vouch for Harry because she wouldn't ask the question "Is Draco safe? Is he in the castle?" because there would be no Draco, and the anger of losing both Lucius and Draco would be enough to let Voldemort know that Harry was alive, so that Voldemort could perform the Killing Curse that this time, would kill Harry.
No, because the Elder Wand still recognized Harry as the true owner so he couldn't be killed with it. Voldy could borrow a wand though and kill Harry.
@@Sharon-pb7so yeah, that's possible. he could have taken another death eaters wand.
@@Sharon-pb7so but harry got the wand from draco so if draco was killed by harry then snape would be the true owner of the wand because he would have killed dumbledore and then when voldermort would have killed snape and then he would have been the true owner of the elder wand which would mean that harry would die
Damn man. I didn’t even consider this but a good video. Really good
what I would say is more segnificant is that (atleast in the movie, sadly have not much knowledge of the books after goblet of fire) Narcissa was the one who checked if Harry was still alive after Voldemort "killed" him. She lied because, if I remember correctly, firstly because the Malfoy's were not feeling quite happy with voldemort being alive and because Harry saved Draco in the Room of Requirement.
In this hypothetical world she would probably tell that he is allive, filled with grief about her son and her husband.
Hey man, been watching your channel for quite a while. Just wanted to let you know that I love what you’re doing and hope you keep it up :)
What if Harry's Sectumsempra killed Draco? Well, his (Draco's) father wouldn't be hearing about that anytime soon!
The other question: would Tom Riddle become really evil and made horcruxes if he didn't unintentionally killed Myrtle? It's easier to become a murder when you already killed someone (though not with his own hands but still). I think that was the crucial point turning him into Voldemort. Like there was no return anyway.
Famous Harry Pottahh can't even go to the bathroom without killing anyone.
Oh my Merlin-
this could have far bigger implications then you realize , Harry feeding the Voldemort horcrux part of himself tainting him more then what a single kill should impowering the link and messing with his mind to the point Harry might join Voldemort
Correction: Katie Bell is NOT Draco's or even Harry's classmate. First of all, she is in Gryffindor, not Slytherin, so she can't be classmates with Draco. Second of all, she is said to be one year older than Harry and Draco.
Not really the focus of the video. Fellow student / schoolmate...whatever.
I don't agree that Snape's sole reason for killing Dumbledore was to save Draco, however. Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him - a terrible thing to ask of anyone but something he would have trusted Snape to do. The effect on Snape of deliberately killing someone is an interesting aside, as I am not sure he ever deliberately did away with anyone in his years of spying. He seemed to be more of an information man.
If, as it appears in the movies, killing Dumbledore and protecting Draco were separate clauses, I feel the contract would go on. Snape would still have to kill Dumbledore to, not only "prove his loyalty", but also because he will die from the contract if he doesn't. I love the theory.
I think you missed something big in the story, cause if Narsissa would know that Harry killed Draco, she wouldn't have said in the forest that he was dead (in the deathly hallows part 2), but she would have said that he was alive or she would have killed him. Right??
Two questions: 1) Would Harry using Sectum Sempra have broken a piece of Harry's soul away from him like Avada Kadavara does? and 2) How would Draco's death affect Harry... I doubt that Harry actually intended to KILL him. Hurt him yes, but kill him? I don't think that was his intent.
The spell he needed during the battle of Hogwarts . What does he use ? Lmao
Harry used expeliarmus
Love it! Great videos! 👍
Dumbledore knows everything? Yeah, long after the facts, otherwise his students wouldn't be constantly in mortal danger or being tortured by a teacher.
What would happen if someone hit Voldemort with Adava kadavra. Would he’s soul leave his body or would it just tickle him
Harry would have died in Malfoy Manor since Draco would not have been there and would not have 'failed' to identify him.
Yeah, the unbreakable vow was first night to protect Malfoy to the best of his capabilities. How can he protect somebody if he's not there to protect them? I think this would have vetoed the unbreakable vow. It basically means if you are in the vicinity and you can do something to save Draco you do it regardless of who is around. But like I just said if you're not there then you can't witness it. You would have no knowledge that the person was ever in any danger, so I think that would be like the one loophole and the unbreakable vow
Great video! I’ve been thinking since I saw the movie in the cinema, how is it possible that Harry was not expelled from the school for attacking other student and almost killing him?
I don't know if you noticed, but he gets special treatment very often. He gets 50 points from the headmaster when he sneezes...
If Snapes Motivation was to safe the son of his former love, well, I would say there is a high chance he'd think enough is enough, when he sees that son actually murdering someone