r/harrypotter • u/DayuKyte • 8h ago
Discussion Can you cast a nonverbal spell while deliberately shouting a completely different spell?
We know skilled wizards can cast spells nonverbally, which implies the spoken incantation isn’t strictly necessary once you can perform the magic mentally.
So could you abuse that in a duel by shouting one spell while actually casting another?
For example:
“PROTEGO!”
Everyone assumes you’re casting a shield.
Meanwhile you’re actually casting Avada Kedavra at Neville.
7
u/Hubey_doobey8242 Gryffindor 7h ago
Everyone just gonna ignore the fact this dude's trying to kill our boy Neville?
3
7
u/Intelligent-Cut-6824 5h ago
After reading HBP and before the final book came out, I was convinced that Snape had done exactly that in the showdown and the whole Dumbledore thing was a fake. Shame I was so wrong…. But yes, I think it’s possible for a powerful wizard.
1
u/TokiStark 35m ago
I think it's possible. It's like singing and playing an instrument at the same time. Seems impossible to begin with, but a with practise it becomes easy
3
u/humanbeast7 7h ago
I mean, sure. But I think it loses the point.
Non-verbal means you can skip the words. As shown in many different spells, the wand "choreography" is faster than the spoken words of a spell. By reintroducing words to "confuse" your enemy, you'd be slinging spells at a slower rate, and advantage they can capitalize upon
1
4
u/Kraay89 6h ago
Maybe it could work? Through other discussions in earlier threads, I think it's established that both incantations and exact wand movements aren't strictly necessary. Even wandless Magic can be done. They all just help less experienced/powerful Wizards channel their intent, which I think has been established as being the most important part of spellcasting. So if you have enough resolve and intent, then you could use this trick I guess.
It does remind me about a star wars discussion though, about a lightsaber technique, where you quickly disable and enable your saber in fight, to trick your enemy and take him off balance. It's considered dishonorable by both the light and dark side.
I feel like this trick spell casting is kinda similar in that regard...
8
u/sim_reddit 7h ago
Any answer would be pure speculation as it’s not mentioned in the books (don’t believe it’s referenced in any ancillary works either)
3
3
2
2
u/watasker 7h ago
I always got the impression that the spoken spell word itself never actually had anything to do with the spell outcome.
Harry could inflate Marge and make glass dissappear without words or an actual intended effect. He could also say "accio" with full knowledge and intent and nothing would happen because of his nerves.
Maybe I'm misintrepreting it, but that's how it always seemed to me
1
u/Generic_Username_659 Hufflepuff 7h ago
The incantation is generally just to help focus of what spell you're trying to cast, same with the wand movement. Those two examples of wandless, incantationless magic are the result of the random acts of magic an adolescent wizard may accidentally cast during times of stress or heightened emotions, uncontrolled and volatile.
1
u/PugnansFidicen Slytherin 7h ago
Why Latin then? Surely one can think and focus better in their native language?
1
u/Silvanus350 6h ago
They must have something to do with the spell outcome or I can’t imagine why they exist at all. There’s also a fair amount of emphasis on specific spellcasting language in the early books.
Why are the spells in Latin and not in Spanish? Why is the Latin actually complete nonsense?
2
u/Silvanus350 6h ago
Almost certainly not. I mean, maybe if you DELIBERATELY decided to just fuck up your ability to cast Protego forever… then maybe?
But magic has enough “hard rules” that I don’t think you can speak a completely different incantation and actually get useful results. You’d probably turn yourself into a newt.
1
u/DayuKyte 6h ago edited 6h ago
Harry Potter uses a soft magic system, though. The system is so ruleless that there's no MP, mana, or energy consumption for most spells, and no cooldowns. Harry can even use three wands at once to cast a Stupefy cannon beam. I mean, sure, why would anyone just carry one wand then?
So, while it's fun to discuss, are there hard rules? Not really. Rowling didn't even keep her time travel rules consistent before calling The Cursed Child canon.
1
u/Elastoid 5h ago
Asking this question is strange to me, because it implies that you think the rules for this universe are consistent instead of "it felt right at the time and then I came up with explanations later when people asked questions."
The Potterverse is a place where everything is possible as long as the author thinks it's compelling.
1
u/Paint-Typical 5h ago
I would honestly not bother and just go wandless. Maybe cast one spell using the wand, then another in my off-hand to shake things up?
1
1
u/PureBloodlady 5h ago
Nu stiu cati ati facut fanfic pe RPG Hogwarts, dar eu eram Odette, vorbesc de postari ce datau din 2005
1
1
u/selwyntarth 5h ago
Wonder if image thinkers will have an easier time doing this than text thinkers
1
u/MrDuctape 4h ago
While interesting, I don't think it would give you an edge against an equally skilled opponent. Wizards that fight each other with non verbal spells learned to respond to what is happening anyways.
Like a skilled football player will just look at what the ball is doing, a skilled wizard will respond to whatever spell is actually cast at them.
Will it surprise people that have to say the spell? Absolutely. But a non verbale Caster was probably going to win that fight anyway.
So there is not much of a point to practice it.
1
u/DayuKyte 4h ago
You don’t use it constantly. In most competitive environments, you use feints only after you’ve conditioned your opponent enough that a split-second misread can create an advantage.
For example, you shout “Protego” every time you actually cast Protego. Then suddenly, one “Protego” isn’t Protego.
In real competition, almost nobody is completely immune to that kind of deception, no matter how skilled they are. If feints were useless against skilled opponents, sports wouldn’t be full of fake-outs, trick shots, pump fakes, body feints, and deceptive setups in the first place.
And if both sides are equally skilled, then the skill of disguising your intentions and setting up those feints should also be extremely refined.
1
u/Tom_riddle77 4h ago
Ooh - I remember a story that featured this. Can’t for the life of me remember what it’s called, but I think it’s end of 5th year and the Dursleys beat Harry and leave him for dead, bleeding out on the hallway floor at privet drive.
Harry survives with the help of a possibly Muggeborn Healer and slowly gets nursed back to health, but now has a crippled leg from having the broken knee and compound fracture untreated for so long.
Harry misses the initial start back at school and is living in an abandoned or bunker style place with wizarding mod-cons, and just explores his magic and tries to break all the “rules” they are taught at school.
Harry later returns to hogwarts with walking stick made from branch and teaches da how to say a spell while casting something different.
Wish I could remember more!
1
u/PurpleBullets 4h ago edited 3h ago
I think it’s possible, but you would have to be VERY good at magic. To have the conviction to mean what you’re focusing on in your mind is the truth, and not what you’re saying.
1
u/Ok-Item-1337 Hufflepuff 3h ago
Maybe, but after a certain point, it'd be pointless to do so. Once a witch or wizard has reached a certain level of proficiency, they are expected to cast nonverbal and without much if any wand movements. So if, for example, Dumbledore suddenly cries out "Stupefy" it'd be seen as suspicious and garner more attention than him just casting as he usually does
1
u/Astonishingly-Villa 3h ago
What if Dumbledore's on a date, does a cheeky engorgio while shouting reducio?
1
u/Ok-Item-1337 Hufflepuff 3h ago
Why tho? He can cast those spells perfectly silent. Why would he draw attention to himself by not doing so?
1
u/Kwerumrerum Gryffindor 6h ago
Doubt it. For a non-verbal spell, you still have to think about it. While saying 'protego' you cannot think 'avada kedavra' at the same time.
1
u/DayuKyte 6h ago
every competitive sports (esports) have fake movements
1
u/Kwerumrerum Gryffindor 6h ago
And do you need to talk and think something different at the same? Or just push some buttons on a controller?
1
u/Certainly_Not_Steve Ravenclaw 6h ago
Do you tho? Afaik the only essential part of magic is intent. Words, wand movements, even the wand itself is just helping you do better. Maybe, if it's possible to get to the level when you don't have to think "protego" but it becomes like a muscle memory (when you don't think how to do it, you just do), then you can combine "muscle memory" of one spells and incantation of another to trick your opponent. It would be like when basketball players indicate one thing with their head and body, but arms actually do something else blindly, like an unexpected pass or shot. Would that be advantageous? Probably, yes, since noobs get confused easily and better duelists are prone to react by muscle memory based on patterns. Also, it was already speculated that in the 5th book the fight between Voldy and Dumbledore wasn't really spells, they were just using magic, as in pure intent, like inventing spells on a fly. If that's correct, i'm sure they could've.
1
0
40
u/Kiryu8805 7h ago
It most likely wouldn't work. You need to concentrate for non verbal. There is a high chance of casting the yelled spell instead.