Wand Lore / Luna / Alchemy

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 181815

> Mike:
> See now, you've called the cave's green goo both potion and poison. 
> What I want to know is what makes us think this stuff was "poison"? 
> Dumbledore didn't expect to die from it. Kreacher *didn't* die from 
> it. 

zgirnius:
In the wizard world one does not necessarily die of poison. (Heck, as 
an excellent post-HBP post I cannot locate stated, this is not even 
true in RL. A substance that causes pain and adverse physical 
symptoms is classed as a poison even if it is not invariably fatal. A 
potion/poison which is not invariably fatal, may still be pretty 
predictably fatal to vulnerable subclasses of the general population 
(such as terminally ill old men, e.g. Dumbledore). And a 'fatal' 
poison may not always be if treated in time in the right way (an 
antidote or bezoar, most likely, in the case of the WW). Which is all 
to say, just because Dumbledore did not have time to die of the 
potion, and Kreacher never did, does not mean it was not poisonous.

Dumbledore, after all, qualifies his assessment about what the potion 
will do by stating that he doubts it will kill him immediately, a 
phrasing which leaves open the possibility that it would do so 
eventually. And, after drinking it, he passes out and cannot be 
revived without repeated use of magic. Can we really say it would not 
have killed him, if Harry had not been there to save him?

It is just as possible that the Inferi are a second line of defense 
against a young and healthy, or magically well-protected, wizard who 
avoids dying of the poison.

>Mike:
> Everything we know says the potion caused a nasty reaction of 
> recalling past indiscretions and an intense thirst. 

zgirnius:
In the instance of Kreacher, we don't have details. In the instance 
of DD, it also caused somewhat deep unconsciousness, followed by 
(after magical resuscitation) signs of increasing physical 
debilitation (at least, no other factor of which I am aware explains 
this latter symptom of Dumbledore, causing over time a weakening so 
severe he was no longer able to stand up, even while leaning on a 
wall.)

> Mike:
> Because of my above basis belief, I don't think the EW would have 
any 
> way of recognizing a new master if DD had died from either the cave 
> potion or from the ring curse. I think that gives the wand too much 
> credit for logical thought and knowledge. How in the hell would a 
> wand know who made a potion that it's master died from? Especially 
if 
> it's master didn't know.

zgirnius:
Even using the logic I snipped, the wand should know, in both 
instances, that its master was magically defeated, if not by whom. 
Because it senses its master, as you suggest. This would seem to me 
enough to prevent the destruction of its power. 

I agree it may not instantly know who its new master is. (Just as in 
DH, possibly, when Harry seized Draco's wand while the EW sat in DD's 
tomb, it did not instantly know it had a new master - it may have 
still 'thought' of Draco and his wand as the victorious combo that 
won it. Until it 'met' that familiar wand and learned Harry had won 
*it*.)

Again using your logic, it would recognize Voldemort's yew/phoenix 
core wand once it met it again, as the wand that killed its master by 
creating a potion/curse.