sectumsempra really is the most interesting curse, theres just something about how much anger and hatred must have been put into "making" that spell especially considering it was meant for the marauders
It is never stated it was meant for the marauders. "For enemies." I believe it was meant for his muggle father. That's the person he hated most I believe. I also belive it was not pure hate but rather fear and helplessness. The desire to get out of his victim-role. As death eter he used the spell, we know from Lupin. But in the books he uses it only once, aiming on a death eaters wand-hand to protect an member of the order, Lupin I remember vaguely. S ectum S empra S everus S nape. Putting the spell he perhaps knew by heart was his signature and insurance. He left the book there, to perheps help a desperate student in potions. But if that student had bad intentions and tried his spell he would be informed immediately.
@@mysteriousxavocado I know. But is it really? What if there's a secret behind it?! The most epic, tragic, dangerous, romantic, spicy, weird Secret EVER?! More on that on my channel. Check it out. After-Note: This was the only advertisement for my channel i would ever make, so i decided it should be the most cheesy advertisement anyone had ever seen. Just for your information...
One of the most important traits of the unforgivable curse is that there is no known protection from it and no counterspell. With that being said, the only one of your five, which could be considered as an unforgivable curse, is Fiendfyre
But Fienfyre WAS countered by Dumbledore in Order of the Phoenix. And even Harry showed that he could fight off the Imperius curse in Goblet of Fire (Book, not movie)
@@dragonweyr44 True, a wizard can defend themselves from Imperius curse. Technically all 3 can be fought, but the caster has to want to use them too. They all require absolute intent, which means the caster intends to cause death, cause horrible pain, and remove the free will of another being. Sure many spells can be lethal, but very few are intended to be. I wouldn't think spells have to unforgivable to charge a person with a crime if deliberately used to inflict harm.
@@dragonweyr44 I think when it comes to unforgivable curses, the only ones that should be permanently banned from use in any context are those like fiendfyre, sectumsempra and crucio. They have no application besides destruction and causing as much harm as possible to the victim. Avada Kedavra however was used by aurors and should still be allowed to be used by them since it is a powerful and somewhat humane combat tool (kills instantly and painlessly)
@@hakon_dlc Instantly, yes, painlessly, that's unknown. Beheadings by sword or guillotine, gas chamber, electric chair and lethal injections are supposedly painless but I think that's just what we tell ourselves so that WE can get through an execution without guilt As far as Aurors using it... I don't think they do. The only time we ever saw or heard of an auror executing someone was in Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them and they used that black pool to try to kill Tina Goldstien and also the Dementor's Kiss but that left the body alive
What about bombarda maxima. There’s no counter mentioned in the books. Also, there would be no healing once blown up. In addition, although sectumsempra has a way to heal and can be blocked unlike avada kedavra, the only person aware of this is Snape, therefore anyone hit by the spell that doesn’t have snape to save them is basically dead at that point. Obliviate also doesn’t have a counterspell and we know this from gilderoy lockhart, who lost his memories permanently. Obviously this spell depends on the extent at which it’s used at, for example hermione uses it on dolohov to take a part of his memory but doesn’t take it all, but he never remembers finding them in tottenham so he can’t alert the deatheaters. Obliviate, used in the deadliest way, would ruin someone’s whole life and it would cause them to live out the rest if their days in a mental asylum like gilderoy lockhart did. However, i do partly agree with you on legilimens because it can be defended and the memories created can be realised as fake just like harry did when Voldemort possessed him. Obviously its not very fair but depends on the circumstance like if an auror was interrogating someone and he went into the memories to see if they had committed a crime. I don’t think think imperius should be an unforgivable spell either tbh if legilimens isn’t though. Imperio allows one control over another. Legilimens can do this indirectly, like when Voldemort implanted the vision of sirius into harry’s mind and caused him to come to the ministry. He didn’t control him directly but made him believe in something when it wasn’t true. Also, sectumsempra’s main purpose is to kill, but it tortures the victim first. This spell is more evil than avada kedavra because it gives a slow and painful death rather than a quick one like avada kedavra. As the books suggest, killing is an act against nature and rips the soul, which is probably one of the reasons avada kedavra was made unforgivable. This spell would do so as well and snape was the only person to know about the cure. If used, it would most likely mean death.
bombD it can be controlled like grindelwalds did though when he was directing it at certain people. It should be unforgivable anyway, a murderer can’t just say “ i used it to see if he was loyal and i guess he wasn’t”.
konkretejack that’s a roblox spell it doesn’t actually kill people. It was used in the books by Amos Diggory to make the dark mark in the sky vanish at the quidditch World Cup.
I feel like the love potion should be illegal because you a literally enslaving someone to you with magic. Furthermore, I believe that people would need a licence to use the memory charm because, for example, neville's parents were tortured into insanity by voldemort's followers. If the staff at st.mungo's were to delete this memory, would this transform them back to normal? If a person experienced a traumatic event and gained PTSD, would deleting that memory also delete their PTSD?
It don't delete memory, but override/cover it, like Hermione is able to get her parents memory back. But maybe it takes great skill and must be done by caster/a person that is familiar with the case, so Lockhart can't be cured in a short time.
@@marixsunnyotp3142 hermione didn't use obliviate on her parents in the books in the movie its a mistake. she does it in the start then in the caffee after the fight with death eaters she says she never used it its just a mistake she used another memory charm
I just picture his nails is the one thing besides immortality Voldy is obsessed with. Like he’s constantly cleaning them before he goes to meet with his lackeys.
I agree there should be restrictions on first 3 spells you mentions definitely. Fiendfyre and sectumsempra I agree should be made illegal. I see an unforgivable spell as a spell they should never be used under ANY circumstances. That’s why they (the 3) were made illegal. Because there is no reason ANYONE should ever use them. However there could be reasons the ones you have mentioned could be used. Bombard a maxima could be used for demolition, clearing overgrown terrain, making tunnels. Legilimens could be used on a criminal to verify the truth. Obliviate could be used to remove extremely painful or disturbing memories (e.g. if someone was raped, or if someone was struggling to overcome something because something traumatic happened etc.) So it could be used in a medical way.
Since all unforgivable curses are only unforgivable when used on humans, his list still stands I think (exept legilimens-I don't see the problem with this spell at all-). So you could kill any creature with avada kedavra and no-one would give a shit. But if you blow someone into a thousand peaces that's kind of rude and should be considered unforgivable. And if if you cut someone open with a hundred wounds that can not be healed so you bleed out and die.. yeah, that is arguably a worse death than just die instantly. And because of that reductio should be considered unforgivable when used on humans. Nobody likes to be Thanos snapped out of existence. So in my opinion switch out legilimens with reductio and the rest is fine.
The problem with using Legillimens in a courtroom is strange since that EVERY time we've seen a courtroom scene in Harry Potter, no one, I repeat, NO ONE has EVER used it on a defendant
Maximilian Dorge even using one of the unforgivable curses on animals could be seen as cruel. Also if they were allowed to be used on animals then people could just try and claim they used the curse on an animal to get away with the crime.
A spell exists to cease all flames by fiendfyre and you can create an opening in it the cease spell requires alot of concentration though so i can kinda understand ppls opinion
PD may have been an unknown spell that the magical authorities didn't know how to ban. Either it was some ancient, forgotten spell that Grindelwald was the first to cast in ages (like Voldemort with his Horcruxes), or a unique spell like Sectumsempra, the existence of which was never announced to the world. I'd also like to propose that PD was possibly an advanced form or outgrowth of Fiendfyre, given its appearance and effects.
The thing I always imagine while watching goblet of fire is how the slitherings were taught the dance for the yule ball. Just imagine how snape will dance and demonstrate it 😂
Another TH-camr Dominic Noble in his Goblet of Fire Lost in Adaptation video parodied that by saying "Malfoy we are going to dance like nobody's watching" as Snape and "I- I don't want to sir" as Draco.
I suspect that the blue fire might have been something like a contract (blue fire in the goblet of fire) and made to protect people. Or (and this is my preferred idea) it is a spell of Grindlewald's own creation and/or uses the power of the elder wand. Flamel is the only one who seems to have an idea on how to stop it and speaks to the fact that out of everyone he might have had the greatest knowledge of the Elder wand since he is almost 600 years old at the point.
@@richardbraithwaite8615 There should probably be a restriction on it, like how nuclear weapons are regulated, but it shouldn't be part of the "Unforgivable Curses". It is a charm, though a dark one, at that, and it doesn't necessarily cause widespread damage. It can be a defensive measure, and an effective one, too. The Unforgivable Curses can only be used to cause harm to someone else intentionally, and have practically no ethical uses. Protegro Diabolica is simply a different type of dangerous.
Then debatable the Imperious Curse can be used for good in circumstances as it could save a life or be used like they did in Gringrotts for the greater good? I get that alot of it is the way you use or if it's only can be used for offense but surely just because it can be defensive far out ways the damage it can cause where a shield charm will do (or Expecto Patronum but that's mainly a shield in the films.) One would assume it's requires a heavy delve into the Dark Art just to do it, like Fiendfyre and it could accidentally do so much destruction.
All the kitchen spells can be used to kill: boiling, roasting, chopping, dicing, slicing, mincing, freezing... Actually, that’s what I believe Molly used to kill Bellatrix
I always wondered why Harry never used sectumsempra on anyone else, like a death eater or something. I thought that he might have used it during the battle of 7 potters or even the battle of Hogwarts, since no one knew it existed and wouldn't know the countercurse except snape. But I guess he just never wanted to kill anyone so he never used it again.
I don't want to sound offensive so please don't take it like that! But if you wonder why Harry did not use it anymore, than you did not understand Harry. Maybe if you only watch the movies it doesn't come through. But the book drives it in that Harry refuses to use lethal spells whenever possible. He refused to stunn people during the Battle of the Seven Potter out of fear that they fall off the broom and die from the drop. In fact, out of Sectumsempra against Malfoy, he barely uses anything outright deadly.
I’m sure there’s a Department of Magical Restriction somewhere in the ministry that makes laws that must be followed for certain spells. For instance Obviate is a mandatory spell to maintain the International Statued of Wizarding Secrecy but if misused like how Lockhart did could easily land one a trip to Azkaban.
Sectumsempra does use wand movement, isn't it cool that the cuts appear in the pattern the wand is waved. When he cursed Draco, even the book says Harry cast the spell, "waving his wand wildly."
To motion games and Michelle the Entrail-Expelling spell is a curse that presumably causes the victims internal organs to be expelled from their body. Most likely being the anus/mouth
That's a combat spell that Aurors should be allowed to use against other wizards, along with the 'everyday' applications of simply cutting stuff or defending yourself against magical creatures
I think that Defodio (The Gouging Charm) is absolutely devastating, since it literally tears you to shreds from the inside out. It is more painful than sectumsempra, for sure, but it kills faster. Although it is used for demolition too, it can be extremely deadly.
Diffindo works like a knife where the scars or the wounds can be tended but the wounds caused by sectumsempra cannot be tended unless its counter curse is used since this spell is a dark spell or dark magic unlike diffindo
@@donidemaru5547 I still think that was a petrificus totallus followed by a really powerful reducto straight to the heart which would make sense because Ginny's reducto was equally as powerful and had to get it from somewhere
I think the curcial part is the "primary purpose" of a spell. Bombarda Maxima, Obliviate and even Legilimens have legitimate purposes whereas the sole purpose of an unforgivable curse is to harm the target one way or the other. As such Sectumsempra should be on the list. - And Fiendfire too, imo. Also certain love potions/spells since they essentially are a 'targeted' imperius curse.
Am i the only one who thinks that having two ads in an 11 min video with 1.5 mins dedicated to a sponsorship is taking monetising your channel a bit too far?
@@sprihakharel319 i love it i live for it and i wish i could be a witch😀😜 and i am proud to be a slytherin if i could go thru a portal in to the harry potter universe i would marrying Draco Malfoy and chillin whit the deatheaters at the malfoy manor yo😂😁😍
Beautiful work as always, in the Order of the Phoenix Harry Potter used crucio and he was an underage wizard.he never got in to any trouble that we know of.
I think the reason Bombarda isn't deemed illegal like the killing curse is because Bombarda can be used for other things. Bomba is just a spell that could be used to kill, but the killing curse was made solely for killing and nothing else, it was made with the sole mindset of taking lives.
Bombarda Maxima is one of the best guesses for which spell Pettigrew used when escaping Black while also killing 12 people so yeah it is wildly dangerous
Spells from the books- Diffindo- the non dark arts version of sectumsempra Confringo- another version of bombarda Incendio- tamer version of protego diabolica Evanesco- straight up vanishes you into who knows where.
Obliviate can be reversed; it is up to the caster whether or not they choose to reverse the spell. If the caster's intent is to leave the memories erased, then yes, they should be sent to Azkaban. Sectumsempra (in the books) actually does follow the caster's wand movements.
Anyone else wondering what the deadly possibilities for lem guardian leviosa are? How fast can you make someone go up or can you move people around while there floating? I know there's probably a counterspell but can you move the thing down really fast if you need to?
I just thought the spell molly cast a bellatrix we didn’t find out what it was but I thing that it was bombarda maxima and you said I could blow up a wizard so
Queries: 1. why didn't HP win DM's wand at 9:00? He defeated _and_ disarmed DM? 2. what if DA told Fudge Umbridge tried to *_kiII_* them with the bomb spell? 3. Voldemort was using legitimacy on Harry, not their exclusive mind connection? 4. 9:16 who's that guy? 5. he doesn't officially count DM's snake spell, Confringo or Expulso as unforgivable?
There is one good reason to use the memory modification charms. What if someone was traumatized by a horrific event like the Great Calamity 100 years prior to The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. Picture the massacre that happened when Calamity Ganon seized control of the Devine Beasts and the guardians. The razing of Castle Town alone would be traumatizing.
Video suggestion: What if Grindelwald escaped and would've joined the battle of Hogwards on the good guys side? (What would've been different) Because he has the powers of Dumble and Voldy so his magical power and extreme intelligence would have been quite useful for the underdogs.
@@jacobwatson4246 I think Grindelwald because Voldemort is less patient + he's arrogant and Grindelwald is calmer and could read Voldemort better and seems to be more cunning. +Voldemort without horcruxes would be scared as hell cuz the fear of death so Grindelwald and Dumbledore would both beat Voldemort hands down.
Sectumpsempra is a slicing/severing spell (given his name is Severus that's rather clever, in my opinion). It DOES matter where you point it and the movements you make or Snape could not have been so precise as to cut George's ear off with it while aiming at a Death Eaters wand hand. When Harry used it he just sort of waved his wand around resulting in large lacerations on Draco. As to only Snape knowing the counter-curse, how did Molly stop George from bleeding to death when his ear was severed?
A Stinging Curse or in fact a Stunning Spell would be like a stun gun. Crucio is more like using torture methods to create unbearable pain but in a way that doesn't leave a physical mark. Definitely Unforgiveable.
Can Bombarda Maxima kill humans? I always thought it only worked on inanimate objects. Sure the impact could kill but I don't think it can be used to directly blow up a person. Also, many spells on this list couldn't be illegal because they do have applications beyond evil deeds. I always thought it to be weird that the Imperius curse was Unforgivable, there are applications where it could prevent ppl or animals from harming themselves. I think the context in which a spell is used is very important, the only spell in my opinion that should be deemed unforgivable is Crucio since torture has no place in a civilized society. Aurors for example should be allowed to use Avada Kedavra and Imperius in action like they were in the times of Grindelwald
Bombarda Maxima isn't that well known. Can it only be used on inanimate objects? No one knows for sure And as for people not being harmed by it, even if they can't be directly, there is still the case that they can be hit by shrapnel from a bombarda blast
1. Sectumsempra 2. Obliviate 3. Bombarda Maxima 4. What was this big fire called? Yea that one 5. Why u force me to make 5 If you want me to sort them then there: 1 - 1 2 - 4 3 - 3 4 - 2 5 - 5
Remember that wonky spell with which Lockhart vanished Harry's arm's bones? Turn it into an actual spell and you have a curse that should be super illegal. Would you imagine hitting someone's head or neck with it? Instant, gruesome kill.
While I certainly agree with the final one, Sectumsempra, I feel the others don't really count as unforgivable as how they are or can be used in the wizarding world. Bombarda (Maxima being just an amplifier which could work with *any* potentially dangerous spell) being used for demolition as suggested, but also potentially for mining. Legilemence should be a necessary spell for finding out truth from deceptive individuals and/or criminals. Obliviate being necessary for secrecy, be that for muggles not knowing if the wizarding world, or for any witch/wizard discovering secret information of the ministry or the like. Now fiend fire could certainly be seen as dangerous, but any spell used in the wrong way has the potential to be the same. Being used against a wizard, I certainly see it as being punishable, but also consider that wizards are not the only threats to wizards. There are many dangerous creatures that these spells can be used to defend yourself with. I could see fiend fire being used to fight something that embodies ice or cold and allow a wizard to escape while the fiend fights for you.
I always immagined Bombarda maxima like a magic grenade. So you can dodge or parry it. That way it would be way weaker than it just blows up what you are focusing on. Fiendfyre and sectum sempra are both considered dark magic which is forbidden almost everywhere. They just don't get punished as harsh as the unforgivable.
Slight correction on Sectumsempra - in the books, there actually IS movement with is, the wand is moved in order to slash the target. On Bombarda Maxima, Legilimens and Obliviate - i think it's because they're "tools" they aren't unforgivable. Like, it is legal to use them with authorization, but illegal (though not unforgivable) to use unauthorized on human beings.
The unvorgiveables cannot be cast accidentally. You have to want to kill, to torture, to controle a person. Bombarda and stuff can also be used helpful without intention of harm. That's the difference. Legilimens usually only works in close proximity and you know about it, imperio can also be held up long term far away. Obliviate has to be used for muggles. Fiendfire is dark magic as same as sectumsempra. But you can kill someone with any spell. Like wingardium leviosa on a big rock and letting it drop over a human. For ss you have countercurses. For the unvorgiveables not. Only harry could resist the emperio. And nevilles parents couldn't be healed.
I'd argue that the Fiend fire curse should be number one. It's not only deadly to its target, but also possibly its user if they can't learn how to control it.
Sectumsempra can be a deadly curse, and I really think Harry shouldn't have used it on Malfoy without knowing what it does, that was pretty impulsive. If a friend found it for the first time and wanted to cast it I'd say "Careful bro, we don't even know what it does", and knowing him he'd say "Well there's only one way to find out" and he'd cast it anyway
If this were the case then maybe levicorpus can be an illegal spell if you threw them away off a cliff? Or somehow using stupefy and the person falls down a hole of doom. Maybe the point is that it really depends on *how* the spells are used. As most spells can produce different outcomes far from the original intentions, such as obliviate backfiring and causing permanent memory damage, maybe a stunning spell such as stupefy made you fall to the ground? It all depends on the situation really.
I always thought that Reducto, Diffindo, and Serpensortia were particularly dangerous as well as some of the transfiguration spells like Duro and even Spongify can be dangerous too if your not careful especially if they're used against humans and animals to turn their body parts to stone or sponges to cause harm.
I personally think those curses are outlawed and septumsempra, fiend fire and obliviate isn't because if you cast the killing curse no one can reverse it, although you can break free of the cruciatus curse when the person torturing you doesn't mean it, it's still not reversable. The imperius curse I believe is fight able like how Barty crouch senior did but you can't really cancel out the curse with a spell. But septumsempra however has a counter curse also made by Snape, and I imagine fiend fire to have 1 too or else hogwarts Castle would be gone by now. And since alot of people working in the ministry use obliviate I believe there should be at least 1 counter spell because of how widespread it is
I'm pretty sure the 1st 3 spells will mean a life sentence in Askaban depending on the way you use them. If you use Legiliemency to be sure someone isn't lying to you, without invading their thoughts, Obliviate a muggle's memory of wittenissing magic or use Bombarda or any other blasting spell without harming anyone there's no reason for people to go to prison because of it. But you can use Stupefy, Impedimenta or Petrificus Totalus to stop or enemies instead of torturing or killing them, and Confundus can give simolilar results to Imperius in a less harmfull way.
I think that the difference between these spells is that there can be correct uses of them (ie obliviating Muggles, Interrogating a suspect, demolitions {Also I seem to recall that Bombada didn't really work on people, just inanimate objects...could be wrong}) whereas the three unforgivables have single purposes to Kill, Torture (for the sole desire to inflict pain, hence why Harry fails using it on Bellatrix) and dominate the will of others. The use of these other spells could end you in Azkaban but you would be able to defend them at trial.
I think the memory read and erase charms would never be forbidden because they are so essential to keep up wizards secrecy. Both are needed to see and erase what muggles have witnessed. So wizard goverment officials would never allow them being banned.
I disagree with "obliviate" because muggles have to have their memory erased in case of them seeing magic. I would add Levicorpus because u coulddrop people from massive heights
My favourite is repulso... Because in the right hands, it can make bombarda seem like a wet fart... A giant aoe shock wave or a directed shock wave? Making it act like a bomb or a gun, if you know how those work...
I know others have commented this, but love potions are what I think are the worst. I mean, you could pretty much force someone to do anything when they were under a love potion, and they would be happy to do it. But, the worst part for me is how casually it’s treated in the books. I mean yeah, the students aren’t supposed to have it, but it sure doesn’t seem like it’s that hard to get a hold of, and I don’t think it ever mentioned any sort of big punishment for using it. Now that I think about it, I wonder if Voldemort was the only person conceived under a love potion.
If you think about it: Obliviate would be the perfect counter to Patronuses, how could you cast a Patronus based on happy memories if there are none to begin with…
Here is the thing: these spells CAN be dangerous. Bombarda maxima CAN kill someone, like bombarda, confringo and expulso. But they can also be used for practical purposes like demolition and clearing etc. that would be like banning knifes, cars, chainsaws, laundry detergent and hands because you COULD probably murder someone using one of those things if you really wanted to. They have other uses, and are hence allowed. The same goes for ligilimens (which can be used for interrogation), and obliviate (which is commonly used on muggles by obliviators). The purpose and only use of the unforgivable curses is to kill, torture or control people. That’s why guns aren’t allowed in most modern countries, because they serve no purpose apart from harming others.
Hermione when talking about the half blood princes potions book says that because the curses where handwritten they were probably illegal meaning that the curses are probably illegal but they don't send you directly to Azkaban.
My friend and I created a spell they we would use in a story we’re co-writing Its called Inficio Inficio: “Infect”; infects enemy; almost always assures victory; incurable
Well, if we put it this way, most of the things in the Wizarding world should be illegal: Quidditch ( highly dangerous), Care of magical creatures ( Hipogriffs, blast end screwts, etc), polijuice potion, well potions in general, etc. I guess the only way to learn magic safely would be Umbridge style. The Wiz world is quite a dangerous place.
I think personally that most on the list should not necessarily be unforgivable but should be tightly controlled as there are legitimate (although narrow) uses for them however the two that I agree on are fiend fire and Sectum Sempra as there are no legitimate uses (that I can think of). Fiend fire takes almost unimaginable skill to control, even Hemianie refused to consider casting it even though she knew it could destroy a horcrux. It also seems to require the same high levels of skill to produce any kind of counter curse yet actually casting fiend fire is alarmingly easy. With Sectum Sempra it is almost a slam dunk as an unforgivable if it were known as it is purely about killing and is fightingly easy to cast even when you don’t know exactly what kind of spell you are casting. The only thing in my mind that could hold it back from being unforgivable is that there is a counter curse however it is not one that looks likely you could cast your self and it is also a very complex counter curse that needs to be performed almost immediately. It is those things that elevate it to unforgivable.
Completely agree with this list, some of the spells I hadn’t thought about in that way such as Bombarda Maxima. Great job! Just wanted to throw in some that I would consider at least having some level of illegality attached to them if not completely unforgivable (in no particular order): 1. I don’t believe the curse was specifically named, but the curse on the opal necklace that ended up cursing Katie Bell. That was horrific, not only from a bystander point of view but what an absolutely horrible way to die. Yes I know she survived, but she only did because Dumbledore was able to preform a counter curse and she still took over 6 months to rehabilitate. Let alone the curse being intended to actually kill you, Katie just got lucky. 2. This might not be agreed with but love potions. So wrong on so many levels, and it’s sold in Hogsmeade village to third years?! We all know what happens when a person is conceived while a parent is under a love potion- you get Voldemort. Let alone that whole act in itself is rape since the person isn’t actually consenting at all. 3. Not a spell, hex or curse but that blood sucking quill Umbridge uses as torture. How is that not illegal? 4. In a similar vein as Sectumsempra, Diffindo can be used on people and it would be very easy to behead someone with it. Avada Kedavra is infinitely more humane than Sectumsempra and a lot of other spells. Instant (I think painless) death is much better than getting cut to bits until you just bleed out. Regardless, love potions in particular really bother me. so incredibly violating.
I think Obliviate should be banned, with one restriction: civilians and corrupt Ministry staff, who AREN'T using the spell in the course of their duties. If something happens that shouldn't, say, 2 young wizards taking the enchanted car belonging to one of the parents, and risking the exposure of the entire Wizarding world, the staff member sent to clean up the mess should NOT face prison for carrying out a necessary duty. However, if a corrupt staff, like Pius Thicknesse for example, should use it to mess with a rival or opponent, he SHOULD be imprisoned.
Though not technically a curse, I think love potions should be included on the list. Basically just date-rape drugs.
Agreed
“Basically just date-rape drugs.” Or like a love-encouraged Imperius Curse.
Platzpropeller except your kid being unable to feel love
also the potion of death i cant remember the name tho
So true also how is poly juice potion even league you can literally frame some one with it
sectumsempra really is the most interesting curse, theres just something about how much anger and hatred must have been put into "making" that spell especially considering it was meant for the marauders
It is never stated it was meant for the marauders. "For enemies." I believe it was meant for his muggle father. That's the person he hated most I believe. I also belive it was not pure hate but rather fear and helplessness. The desire to get out of his victim-role. As death eter he used the spell, we know from Lupin. But in the books he uses it only once, aiming on a death eaters wand-hand to protect an member of the order, Lupin I remember vaguely.
S ectum S empra S everus S nape. Putting the spell he perhaps knew by heart was his signature and insurance. He left the book there, to perheps help a desperate student in potions. But if that student had bad intentions and tried his spell he would be informed immediately.
Alohomora!!
@@mysteriousxavocado I know. But is it really?
What if there's a secret behind it?!
The most epic, tragic, dangerous, romantic, spicy, weird Secret EVER?!
More on that on my channel.
Check it out.
After-Note: This was the only advertisement for my channel i would ever make, so i decided it should be the most cheesy advertisement anyone had ever seen. Just for your information...
@@slevinchannel7589 Mate... I kinda wanna watch it now just because of the honesty
sectumsempra was the only spell i thought about
When Voldemort was mentioned, I got a haircare ad.
Oh my lol what if you got a nose percing one after
Hayden Nugent I got a nose hair trimming ad, then a spray tan ad lol
The ads are just trolling Voldemort aren't they?
I got a kettle chips ad. Wait. What does that have to do with Voldemort?
I got a plastic surgery ad .
Voldemort really needs it.
Sectumsempra always stood out to me. Literally can be the killing curse but more brutal
I remembered when Harry cast that spell to Draco.. It shook me up
Well it wasn't well known since snape made it
But there's a way to reverse the damage it does which makes the killing curse much more powerful
It’s the same thing practically but it’s painful and it’s torture.
But it has a counter curse
Hedwig dying is unforgivable 😭
HP unforgivable curses:
Sirius dieing
Remus dieing
Fred dieing
Maryam Alafifi dumbledoor, james and lilly potter?
@@maryamalafifi9376 Snape too
Agreeee😭😭😭
What about Dobby and lupin and Tonks guys they exist people forget about them they should have killed us bridge though
One of the most important traits of the unforgivable curse is that there is no known protection from it and no counterspell. With that being said, the only one of your five, which could be considered as an unforgivable curse, is Fiendfyre
But Fienfyre WAS countered by Dumbledore in Order of the Phoenix. And even Harry showed that he could fight off the Imperius curse in Goblet of Fire (Book, not movie)
@@dragonweyr44 True, a wizard can defend themselves from Imperius curse. Technically all 3 can be fought, but the caster has to want to use them too. They all require absolute intent, which means the caster intends to cause death, cause horrible pain, and remove the free will of another being. Sure many spells can be lethal, but very few are intended to be. I wouldn't think spells have to unforgivable to charge a person with a crime if deliberately used to inflict harm.
@@dragonweyr44 I think when it comes to unforgivable curses, the only ones that should be permanently banned from use in any context are those like fiendfyre, sectumsempra and crucio. They have no application besides destruction and causing as much harm as possible to the victim. Avada Kedavra however was used by aurors and should still be allowed to be used by them since it is a powerful and somewhat humane combat tool (kills instantly and painlessly)
@@hakon_dlc Instantly, yes, painlessly, that's unknown.
Beheadings by sword or guillotine, gas chamber, electric chair and lethal injections are supposedly painless but I think that's just what we tell ourselves so that WE can get through an execution without guilt
As far as Aurors using it... I don't think they do.
The only time we ever saw or heard of an auror executing someone was in Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them and they used that black pool to try to kill Tina Goldstien and also the Dementor's Kiss but that left the body alive
What about bombarda maxima. There’s no counter mentioned in the books. Also, there would be no healing once blown up. In addition, although sectumsempra has a way to heal and can be blocked unlike avada kedavra, the only person aware of this is Snape, therefore anyone hit by the spell that doesn’t have snape to save them is basically dead at that point. Obliviate also doesn’t have a counterspell and we know this from gilderoy lockhart, who lost his memories permanently. Obviously this spell depends on the extent at which it’s used at, for example hermione uses it on dolohov to take a part of his memory but doesn’t take it all, but he never remembers finding them in tottenham so he can’t alert the deatheaters. Obliviate, used in the deadliest way, would ruin someone’s whole life and it would cause them to live out the rest if their days in a mental asylum like gilderoy lockhart did.
However, i do partly agree with you on legilimens because it can be defended and the memories created can be realised as fake just like harry did when Voldemort possessed him. Obviously its not very fair but depends on the circumstance like if an auror was interrogating someone and he went into the memories to see if they had committed a crime.
I don’t think think imperius should be an unforgivable spell either tbh if legilimens isn’t though. Imperio allows one control over another. Legilimens can do this indirectly, like when Voldemort implanted the vision of sirius into harry’s mind and caused him to come to the ministry. He didn’t control him directly but made him believe in something when it wasn’t true. Also, sectumsempra’s main purpose is to kill, but it tortures the victim first. This spell is more evil than avada kedavra because it gives a slow and painful death rather than a quick one like avada kedavra. As the books suggest, killing is an act against nature and rips the soul, which is probably one of the reasons avada kedavra was made unforgivable. This spell would do so as well and snape was the only person to know about the cure. If used, it would most likely mean death.
Avada Kedavra: I am the strongest killing spell there is.
*Protego Diabolica has entered the chat*
protego diabolica can only kill if those who aren't loyal to you tries to cross the fire
bombD it can be controlled like grindelwalds did though when he was directing it at certain people. It should be unforgivable anyway, a murderer can’t just say “ i used it to see if he was loyal and i guess he wasn’t”.
ever met this guy he's called deletrius
konkretejack was it in hp
konkretejack that’s a roblox spell it doesn’t actually kill people. It was used in the books by Amos Diggory to make the dark mark in the sky vanish at the quidditch World Cup.
I feel like the love potion should be illegal because you a literally enslaving someone to you with magic.
Furthermore, I believe that people would need a licence to use the memory charm because, for example, neville's parents were tortured into insanity by voldemort's followers. If the staff at st.mungo's were to delete this memory, would this transform them back to normal? If a person experienced a traumatic event and gained PTSD, would deleting that memory also delete their PTSD?
Yeah
It don't delete memory, but override/cover it, like Hermione is able to get her parents memory back. But maybe it takes great skill and must be done by caster/a person that is familiar with the case, so Lockhart can't be cured in a short time.
I feel like the muscle memory aspect of ptsd kind of prevents any kind of healing when it comes to cases like the Longbottoms.
@@marixsunnyotp3142 hermione didn't use obliviate on her parents in the books in the movie its a mistake. she does it in the start then in the caffee after the fight with death eaters she says she never used it its just a mistake she used another memory charm
@@aymanebelmamoune2919 ok my source suck I guess
I R E A L L Y L I K E H A R R Y P O T T E R here is an idea: why does Voldemort have his nails done?
I was always like “new nails FRESH OUT THE CAULDRON” whenever I watched the grave yard scene in Goblet of Fire and just made fun of his nasty nails.
@@itztinykookie6758 im laughing so hard
Because he's fabulous
I just picture his nails is the one thing besides immortality Voldy is obsessed with. Like he’s constantly cleaning them before he goes to meet with his lackeys.
Alicia Star and floss his teeth
I agree there should be restrictions on first 3 spells you mentions definitely. Fiendfyre and sectumsempra I agree should be made illegal. I see an unforgivable spell as a spell they should never be used under ANY circumstances. That’s why they (the 3) were made illegal. Because there is no reason ANYONE should ever use them. However there could be reasons the ones you have mentioned could be used. Bombard a maxima could be used for demolition, clearing overgrown terrain, making tunnels. Legilimens could be used on a criminal to verify the truth. Obliviate could be used to remove extremely painful or disturbing memories (e.g. if someone was raped, or if someone was struggling to overcome something because something traumatic happened etc.) So it could be used in a medical way.
Since all unforgivable curses are only unforgivable when used on humans, his list still stands I think (exept legilimens-I don't see the problem with this spell at all-). So you could kill any creature with avada kedavra and no-one would give a shit. But if you blow someone into a thousand peaces that's kind of rude and should be considered unforgivable. And if if you cut someone open with a hundred wounds that can not be healed so you bleed out and die.. yeah, that is arguably a worse death than just die instantly. And because of that reductio should be considered unforgivable when used on humans. Nobody likes to be Thanos snapped out of existence. So in my opinion switch out legilimens with reductio and the rest is fine.
The problem with using Legillimens in a courtroom is strange since that EVERY time we've seen a courtroom scene in Harry Potter, no one, I repeat, NO ONE has EVER used it on a defendant
Maximilian Dorge even using one of the unforgivable curses on animals could be seen as cruel. Also if they were allowed to be used on animals then people could just try and claim they used the curse on an animal to get away with the crime.
Ben Tarr will correct. My iPad is often auto correcting stuff. It can be quite annoying.
A spell exists to cease all flames by fiendfyre and you can create an opening in it the cease spell requires alot of concentration though so i can kinda understand ppls opinion
Protego diabolica should be added to the list 🤔 nearly destroyed an entire city
I thought that was the obvious final unforgivable curse. Sectumsempra caught me offguard
PD may have been an unknown spell that the magical authorities didn't know how to ban. Either it was some ancient, forgotten spell that Grindelwald was the first to cast in ages (like Voldemort with his Horcruxes), or a unique spell like Sectumsempra, the existence of which was never announced to the world.
I'd also like to propose that PD was possibly an advanced form or outgrowth of Fiendfyre, given its appearance and effects.
Am I the only one that doesn't know what this spell does?
@@vexywexypoo It's the blue fire spell from Crimes of Grindelwald
DEFINITELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The thing I always imagine while watching goblet of fire is how the slitherings were taught the dance for the yule ball. Just imagine how snape will dance and demonstrate it 😂
Another TH-camr Dominic Noble in his Goblet of Fire Lost in Adaptation video parodied that by saying "Malfoy we are going to dance like nobody's watching" as Snape and "I- I don't want to sir" as Draco.
😅😅
Omg that is actually so true when you think about it!!! 😂😂😂😂😂
Forget snape, what about flitwick 💀🤚
@@mqntysky9957 omg yeah lol!!!!! Would've had to bring in a short first year to demonstrate 😂
I would add Protego Diabolica to this list. Great list though, all of them make sense and this should not replace any of them, just be added to them.
Just researching this myself. Tops my list as it would of blown up Paris, it's a Mini Nuke.
I suspect that the blue fire might have been something like a contract (blue fire in the goblet of fire) and made to protect people. Or (and this is my preferred idea) it is a spell of Grindlewald's own creation and/or uses the power of the elder wand. Flamel is the only one who seems to have an idea on how to stop it and speaks to the fact that out of everyone he might have had the greatest knowledge of the Elder wand since he is almost 600 years old at the point.
@@richardbraithwaite8615 There should probably be a restriction on it, like how nuclear weapons are regulated, but it shouldn't be part of the "Unforgivable Curses". It is a charm, though a dark one, at that, and it doesn't necessarily cause widespread damage. It can be a defensive measure, and an effective one, too. The Unforgivable Curses can only be used to cause harm to someone else intentionally, and have practically no ethical uses. Protegro Diabolica is simply a different type of dangerous.
Then debatable the Imperious Curse can be used for good in circumstances as it could save a life or be used like they did in Gringrotts for the greater good? I get that alot of it is the way you use or if it's only can be used for offense but surely just because it can be defensive far out ways the damage it can cause where a shield charm will do (or Expecto Patronum but that's mainly a shield in the films.) One would assume it's requires a heavy delve into the Dark Art just to do it, like Fiendfyre and it could accidentally do so much destruction.
No one thinks about Transmorfigan Torture this is a vile spell search it on the wiki
Umbridge should be made illegal and unforgivable
The thought of her ‘special’ quills make my hands hurt
Agreed
Covid-19 is already an unforgivable curse...
Timothy Guan so true man
Agreed!
Yep
Timothy Guan yeah. It also seems like a plague that a god would send.
Hayli Hill uep
3:39 basically the “FBI OPEN UP” but in the wizard world.
All the kitchen spells can be used to kill: boiling, roasting, chopping, dicing, slicing, mincing, freezing...
Actually, that’s what I believe Molly used to kill Bellatrix
Omg true.....
@@sonamonichakraborty2903 and that's probably why Bellatrix couldn't counter it - I can't imagine her being good with kitchen spells
now im scared
@@miriam3848 bella cooking for voldy
I always wondered why Harry never used sectumsempra on anyone else, like a death eater or something. I thought that he might have used it during the battle of 7 potters or even the battle of Hogwarts, since no one knew it existed and wouldn't know the countercurse except snape. But I guess he just never wanted to kill anyone so he never used it again.
I also think he did not know what it does and tried it out on Draco. When he saw what it does he never used it again
I don't want to sound offensive so please don't take it like that! But if you wonder why Harry did not use it anymore, than you did not understand Harry. Maybe if you only watch the movies it doesn't come through. But the book drives it in that Harry refuses to use lethal spells whenever possible. He refused to stunn people during the Battle of the Seven Potter out of fear that they fall off the broom and die from the drop. In fact, out of Sectumsempra against Malfoy, he barely uses anything outright deadly.
He tried to use it on snape
@@eliseversteeg7089 moment of anger but other than that time never
Do a: what if all of the Hogwarts defenders shot a curse at Voldemort when he said that Harry Potter is dead😂
He would've blocked them all cause Voldy is a beast
Arian Smith yep
Probably would work
The Antichrisp Methinks you're forgetting, Moldevort could read, minds. He would anticipate the deatheaters would be about to curse him.
@@jenlfpotter3870 they never said death eaters
This Quarantine season has brought us a LOT of videos
Just goes to show you Snape was a badass wizard and I dare say he could rival Tom Riddle.......
Thank you for your approval
No
I’m sure there’s a Department of Magical Restriction somewhere in the ministry that makes laws that must be followed for certain spells. For instance Obviate is a mandatory spell to maintain the International Statued of Wizarding Secrecy but if misused like how Lockhart did could easily land one a trip to Azkaban.
Most likely , also if there's therapy in the Wizarding world they could perhaps use it to erase trauma
Sectumsempra does use wand movement, isn't it cool that the cuts appear in the pattern the wand is waved.
When he cursed Draco, even the book says Harry cast the spell, "waving his wand wildly."
Love potions should be illegal. Maybe a list of "Unforgivable Potions"?
The way I see it, Legillimens could also be used for psychiarty.
I use that spell as my main spell in ro wizard From roblox
I believe that the Entrail-Expelling Curse should be banned and I don’t think I have to explain why.
What is rhat
What is that?
i can agree on that.
To motion games and Michelle the Entrail-Expelling spell is a curse that presumably causes the victims internal organs to be expelled from their body. Most likely being the anus/mouth
And the falling out bowels curse that was mentioned in St Mungo's hospital on a portrait
I would say Confringo as well. It can take out a group of wizards so it’s practically a bomb.
It's cool to see you releasing a video that has a "back to your roots" kind of feel to it. Hope all is well and you are staying safe brother.
How about reducto? It literally destroys solid matter. That hits your skin, you lose your limbs or even die.
That's a combat spell that Aurors should be allowed to use against other wizards, along with the 'everyday' applications of simply cutting stuff or defending yourself against magical creatures
Well I mean there’s always that time when you might need to kill someone In the wizarding world
I think that Defodio (The Gouging Charm) is absolutely devastating, since it literally tears you to shreds from the inside out. It is more painful than sectumsempra, for sure, but it kills faster. Although it is used for demolition too, it can be extremely deadly.
Diffindo works like a knife where the scars or the wounds can be tended but the wounds caused by sectumsempra cannot be tended unless its counter curse is used since this spell is a dark spell or dark magic unlike diffindo
Ligiliments should be allowed to erase memories if someone is given permission to do so
I just want to mention it’s still illegal to kill someone without the killing curse
Sectumsempra is a really cool spell but shouldn't be banned. As long as everyone knows the counter-curse *Vulnera Sanentur*
Sectumsempra and fiendfyre should be banned but Dolohov's purple flame curse is totally okay?! ...o.O
Or the thing molly used to kill bellatrix
@@pherofn8324 Confringo?
@@donidemaru5547 no defodio
@@donidemaru5547 I still think that was a petrificus totallus followed by a really powerful reducto straight to the heart which would make sense because Ginny's reducto was equally as powerful and had to get it from somewhere
The reason is simple : 8 unforgivable curses would be hard to remeber by the fans and it is not as catchy as 3 unforgivable curses
I think the curcial part is the "primary purpose" of a spell. Bombarda Maxima, Obliviate and even Legilimens have legitimate purposes whereas the sole purpose of an unforgivable curse is to harm the target one way or the other. As such Sectumsempra should be on the list. - And Fiendfire too, imo. Also certain love potions/spells since they essentially are a 'targeted' imperius curse.
I have a new theory, Francis the fish was Lily’s horcrux
Lol
then who did she kill to create it???? lily is not an evil witch.
Rosy The Riveter or was she 😯😲😮
lily is not the type of person to make a horcrux, besides Francis the fish isn’t even in the books
Why did you say that?
Am i the only one who thinks that having two ads in an 11 min video with 1.5 mins dedicated to a sponsorship is taking monetising your channel a bit too far?
Do we know that "bombarda" is able to be used on living beings? That the spell would actually work on living beings?
Entrails expelling curse
*Disarming Jinx
It's okay to think Sectumsempra is cool because it's fiction
I think its cool...are you in slytherin too?
@@Donnie.parlello92 No I'm a Ravenclaw
I’m a Ravenclaw to
Lol! The entire thing is a fiction tbh
@@sprihakharel319 i love it i live for it and i wish i could be a witch😀😜 and i am proud to be a slytherin if i could go thru a portal in to the harry potter universe i would marrying Draco Malfoy and chillin whit the deatheaters at the malfoy manor yo😂😁😍
Beautiful work as always, in the Order of the Phoenix Harry Potter used crucio and he was an underage wizard.he never got in to any trouble that we know of.
@smarts exactly, poor guy Redwolf Miller lacks the mental capability to understand that.
I think the reason Bombarda isn't deemed illegal like the killing curse is because Bombarda can be used for other things. Bomba is just a spell that could be used to kill, but the killing curse was made solely for killing and nothing else, it was made with the sole mindset of taking lives.
Bombarda Maxima is one of the best guesses for which spell Pettigrew used when escaping Black while also killing 12 people so yeah it is wildly dangerous
I'd assume that order member Benjy Fenwick who was described as being found in bits by Moody was probably mutilated with that very spell
@@minhajnizam5090 Could also mean that Sectumsempra was used repeatedly as even Snape's countercurse seems to be unable to regrow sliced of limbs
I like the intro. Not sure if it's new, just like it.
I always thought sectumsempra required wand movement to direct the slashes as if slashing with an actual sword
Spells from the books-
Diffindo- the non dark arts version of sectumsempra
Confringo- another version of bombarda
Incendio- tamer version of protego diabolica
Evanesco- straight up vanishes you into who knows where.
Evanescence destroys the soul as well
google it but not on Pottermore or Harry Potter wiki
Obliviate can be reversed; it is up to the caster whether or not they choose to reverse the spell. If the caster's intent is to leave the memories erased, then yes, they should be sent to Azkaban. Sectumsempra (in the books) actually does follow the caster's wand movements.
Anyone else wondering what the deadly possibilities for lem guardian leviosa are? How fast can you make someone go up or can you move people around while there floating? I know there's probably a counterspell but can you move the thing down really fast if you need to?
Levicoprus
I just thought the spell molly cast a bellatrix we didn’t find out what it was but I thing that it was bombarda maxima and you said I could blow up a wizard so
Queries: 1. why didn't HP win DM's wand at 9:00? He defeated _and_ disarmed DM? 2. what if DA told Fudge Umbridge tried to *_kiII_* them with the bomb spell? 3. Voldemort was using legitimacy on Harry, not their exclusive mind connection? 4. 9:16 who's that guy? 5. he doesn't officially count DM's snake spell, Confringo or Expulso as unforgivable?
There is one good reason to use the memory modification charms. What if someone was traumatized by a horrific event like the Great Calamity 100 years prior to The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. Picture the massacre that happened when Calamity Ganon seized control of the Devine Beasts and the guardians. The razing of Castle Town alone would be traumatizing.
Video suggestion:
What if Grindelwald escaped and would've joined the battle of Hogwards on the good guys side? (What would've been different)
Because he has the powers of Dumble and Voldy so his magical power and extreme intelligence would have been quite useful for the underdogs.
Who would win in a 1v1, Grindelwald or Voldemort at full powers?
@@jacobwatson4246 I think Grindelwald because Voldemort is less patient + he's arrogant and Grindelwald is calmer and could read Voldemort better and seems to be more cunning. +Voldemort without horcruxes would be scared as hell cuz the fear of death so Grindelwald and Dumbledore would both beat Voldemort hands down.
Setumsempra, Fyendfyre and Protego Diabolca should be made illegal
Sectumpsempra is a slicing/severing spell (given his name is Severus that's rather clever, in my opinion). It DOES matter where you point it and the movements you make or Snape could not have been so precise as to cut George's ear off with it while aiming at a Death Eaters wand hand. When Harry used it he just sort of waved his wand around resulting in large lacerations on Draco. As to only Snape knowing the counter-curse, how did Molly stop George from bleeding to death when his ear was severed?
5.infernum (firestorm)
4.white beam (grindelwald used to incinerate 5 aurors)
3.fiendfyre
2.sectumsempra
1.protego diabolica
Is it me or curcio isn't that bad. Like I could definitely see Aurora's using it as a stun gun
You have to mean to cause pain to your target in order to cast Crucio properly.
@@darthportus yeah and that guy is pissing me off all the way over there
The Antichrisp what
@@motiongames6072 I'd be a horrible Aurora
A Stinging Curse or in fact a Stunning Spell would be like a stun gun. Crucio is more like using torture methods to create unbearable pain but in a way that doesn't leave a physical mark. Definitely Unforgiveable.
Can Inferni be affected by the Killing Curse?
Everything that has a soul can be affected by the killing curse.
Marphey rhere sole has passedon
I don’t think so, since inferi are essentially corpses, they’re already dead.
Nope..........they don't have souls. They are literally like muggle world zombies
They were dead already.
"It could make you blow up." Spontaneous human combustion does exist!
Sectumsempra is a perfect example of why not to use random spells when you don’t know what it does
Can Bombarda Maxima kill humans? I always thought it only worked on inanimate objects. Sure the impact could kill but I don't think it can be used to directly blow up a person. Also, many spells on this list couldn't be illegal because they do have applications beyond evil deeds. I always thought it to be weird that the Imperius curse was Unforgivable, there are applications where it could prevent ppl or animals from harming themselves. I think the context in which a spell is used is very important, the only spell in my opinion that should be deemed unforgivable is Crucio since torture has no place in a civilized society. Aurors for example should be allowed to use Avada Kedavra and Imperius in action like they were in the times of Grindelwald
Bombarda Maxima isn't that well known. Can it only be used on inanimate objects? No one knows for sure
And as for people not being harmed by it, even if they can't be directly, there is still the case that they can be hit by shrapnel from a bombarda blast
If it only affects objects then it could just as well apply to the clothing your opponent wears.
The impact of it probably killed Fred
Bombarda maxima isn't actually canon. It was only in the movies. Although we could assume it perhaps exists in the books too
Me seeing the like to dislike ratio: Perfectly balanced as all things should be.
33 went out of there way to dislike. I rarely ever dislike any videos
1. Sectumsempra
2. Obliviate
3. Bombarda Maxima
4. What was this big fire called? Yea that one
5. Why u force me to make 5
If you want me to sort them then there:
1 - 1
2 - 4
3 - 3
4 - 2
5 - 5
Remember that wonky spell with which Lockhart vanished Harry's arm's bones? Turn it into an actual spell and you have a curse that should be super illegal.
Would you imagine hitting someone's head or neck with it? Instant, gruesome kill.
I agree on number one it’s definitely the fourth unforgivable curse
Why is Bombarda Maxima an unforgivable curse?
While I certainly agree with the final one, Sectumsempra, I feel the others don't really count as unforgivable as how they are or can be used in the wizarding world. Bombarda (Maxima being just an amplifier which could work with *any* potentially dangerous spell) being used for demolition as suggested, but also potentially for mining. Legilemence should be a necessary spell for finding out truth from deceptive individuals and/or criminals. Obliviate being necessary for secrecy, be that for muggles not knowing if the wizarding world, or for any witch/wizard discovering secret information of the ministry or the like. Now fiend fire could certainly be seen as dangerous, but any spell used in the wrong way has the potential to be the same. Being used against a wizard, I certainly see it as being punishable, but also consider that wizards are not the only threats to wizards. There are many dangerous creatures that these spells can be used to defend yourself with. I could see fiend fire being used to fight something that embodies ice or cold and allow a wizard to escape while the fiend fights for you.
I always immagined Bombarda maxima like a magic grenade. So you can dodge or parry it. That way it would be way weaker than it just blows up what you are focusing on.
Fiendfyre and sectum sempra are both considered dark magic which is forbidden almost everywhere. They just don't get punished as harsh as the unforgivable.
sectum sempra is like the killing curse but it causes a slow and painful death
First
Edit: *oh I was actually first lol*
Second
Malfoy day potttaaaaa
『Da Army that Blinked Once』 🤫
Slight correction on Sectumsempra - in the books, there actually IS movement with is, the wand is moved in order to slash the target.
On Bombarda Maxima, Legilimens and Obliviate - i think it's because they're "tools" they aren't unforgivable. Like, it is legal to use them with authorization, but illegal (though not unforgivable) to use unauthorized on human beings.
The unvorgiveables cannot be cast accidentally. You have to want to kill, to torture, to controle a person. Bombarda and stuff can also be used helpful without intention of harm. That's the difference. Legilimens usually only works in close proximity and you know about it, imperio can also be held up long term far away. Obliviate has to be used for muggles. Fiendfire is dark magic as same as sectumsempra. But you can kill someone with any spell. Like wingardium leviosa on a big rock and letting it drop over a human. For ss you have countercurses. For the unvorgiveables not. Only harry could resist the emperio. And nevilles parents couldn't be healed.
5 Entrail expulsion curse 4 Transmogrifian torture 3 Fiendfire 2 Protego Diabolica (which nearly destroyed Paris so basically a magic nuke) 1 Horcrux creation spell
I'd argue that the Fiend fire curse should be number one. It's not only deadly to its target, but also possibly its user if they can't learn how to control it.
I have a question for a theory! What if crookshanks ate Peter Pettigrew the first time he saw him?
Sectumsempra can be a deadly curse, and I really think Harry shouldn't have used it on Malfoy without knowing what it does, that was pretty impulsive. If a friend found it for the first time and wanted to cast it I'd say "Careful bro, we don't even know what it does", and knowing him he'd say "Well there's only one way to find out" and he'd cast it anyway
If this were the case then maybe levicorpus can be an illegal spell if you threw them away off a cliff? Or somehow using stupefy and the person falls down a hole of doom. Maybe the point is that it really depends on *how* the spells are used. As most spells can produce different outcomes far from the original intentions, such as obliviate backfiring and causing permanent memory damage, maybe a stunning spell such as stupefy made you fall to the ground? It all depends on the situation really.
I always thought that Reducto, Diffindo, and Serpensortia were particularly dangerous as well as some of the transfiguration spells like Duro and even Spongify can be dangerous too if your not careful especially if they're used against humans and animals to turn their body parts to stone or sponges to cause harm.
Serpensortia is such a dark magic spell imo
Cruciatus curse : I am the worst spell in history.
COVID 19 : AMATEUR
I personally think those curses are outlawed and septumsempra, fiend fire and obliviate isn't because if you cast the killing curse no one can reverse it, although you can break free of the cruciatus curse when the person torturing you doesn't mean it, it's still not reversable. The imperius curse I believe is fight able like how Barty crouch senior did but you can't really cancel out the curse with a spell. But septumsempra however has a counter curse also made by Snape, and I imagine fiend fire to have 1 too or else hogwarts Castle would be gone by now. And since alot of people working in the ministry use obliviate I believe there should be at least 1 counter spell because of how widespread it is
Loving the new intro Dean!
I'm pretty sure the 1st 3 spells will mean a life sentence in Askaban depending on the way you use them. If you use Legiliemency to be sure someone isn't lying to you, without invading their thoughts, Obliviate a muggle's memory of wittenissing magic or use Bombarda or any other blasting spell without harming anyone there's no reason for people to go to prison because of it. But you can use Stupefy, Impedimenta or Petrificus Totalus to stop or enemies instead of torturing or killing them, and Confundus can give simolilar results to Imperius in a less harmfull way.
I think that the difference between these spells is that there can be correct uses of them (ie obliviating Muggles, Interrogating a suspect, demolitions {Also I seem to recall that Bombada didn't really work on people, just inanimate objects...could be wrong}) whereas the three unforgivables have single purposes to Kill, Torture (for the sole desire to inflict pain, hence why Harry fails using it on Bellatrix) and dominate the will of others. The use of these other spells could end you in Azkaban but you would be able to defend them at trial.
I think the memory read and erase charms would never be forbidden because they are so essential to keep up wizards secrecy. Both are needed to see and erase what muggles have witnessed. So wizard goverment officials would never allow them being banned.
I disagree with "obliviate" because muggles have to have their memory erased in case of them seeing magic. I would add Levicorpus because u coulddrop people from massive heights
Levicorpus probably not, because of Arresto Momentum.
Arresto Momentum allows you do slow or stop the velocity of a target or object.
My favourite is repulso...
Because in the right hands, it can make bombarda seem like a wet fart...
A giant aoe shock wave or a directed shock wave?
Making it act like a bomb or a gun, if you know how those work...
I know others have commented this, but love potions are what I think are the worst. I mean, you could pretty much force someone to do anything when they were under a love potion, and they would be happy to do it. But, the worst part for me is how casually it’s treated in the books. I mean yeah, the students aren’t supposed to have it, but it sure doesn’t seem like it’s that hard to get a hold of, and I don’t think it ever mentioned any sort of big punishment for using it. Now that I think about it, I wonder if Voldemort was the only person conceived under a love potion.
If you think about it: Obliviate would be the perfect counter to Patronuses, how could you cast a Patronus based on happy memories if there are none to begin with…
Here is the thing: these spells CAN be dangerous. Bombarda maxima CAN kill someone, like bombarda, confringo and expulso. But they can also be used for practical purposes like demolition and clearing etc. that would be like banning knifes, cars, chainsaws, laundry detergent and hands because you COULD probably murder someone using one of those things if you really wanted to. They have other uses, and are hence allowed. The same goes for ligilimens (which can be used for interrogation), and obliviate (which is commonly used on muggles by obliviators). The purpose and only use of the unforgivable curses is to kill, torture or control people. That’s why guns aren’t allowed in most modern countries, because they serve no purpose apart from harming others.
i think i remember the bombarda spell being explained in either the first or second movie by hermione as a spell that is to only be used on objects
Hermione when talking about the half blood princes potions book says that because the curses where handwritten they were probably illegal meaning that the curses are probably illegal but they don't send you directly to Azkaban.
My friend and I created a spell they we would use in a story we’re co-writing
Its called Inficio
Inficio: “Infect”; infects enemy; almost always assures victory; incurable
I just realized that it shouldn’t even be a problem to tell if people were lying about being under the imperious curse since Legimense exists
Why do people always get that wrong? "Obliviate" is the memory changing charm, the memory is deleted by "Amnesia"
Well, if we put it this way, most of the things in the Wizarding world should be illegal: Quidditch ( highly dangerous), Care of magical creatures ( Hipogriffs, blast end screwts, etc), polijuice potion, well potions in general, etc. I guess the only way to learn magic safely would be Umbridge style.
The Wiz world is quite a dangerous place.
I hope that Sectumsempra will get mentioned.
I think personally that most on the list should not necessarily be unforgivable but should be tightly controlled as there are legitimate (although narrow) uses for them however the two that I agree on are fiend fire and Sectum Sempra as there are no legitimate uses (that I can think of). Fiend fire takes almost unimaginable skill to control, even Hemianie refused to consider casting it even though she knew it could destroy a horcrux. It also seems to require the same high levels of skill to produce any kind of counter curse yet actually casting fiend fire is alarmingly easy. With Sectum Sempra it is almost a slam dunk as an unforgivable if it were known as it is purely about killing and is fightingly easy to cast even when you don’t know exactly what kind of spell you are casting. The only thing in my mind that could hold it back from being unforgivable is that there is a counter curse however it is not one that looks likely you could cast your self and it is also a very complex counter curse that needs to be performed almost immediately. It is those things that elevate it to unforgivable.
Completely agree with this list, some of the spells I hadn’t thought about in that way such as Bombarda Maxima. Great job!
Just wanted to throw in some that I would consider at least having some level of illegality attached to them if not completely unforgivable (in no particular order): 1. I don’t believe the curse was specifically named, but the curse on the opal necklace that ended up cursing Katie Bell. That was horrific, not only from a bystander point of view but what an absolutely horrible way to die. Yes I know she survived, but she only did because Dumbledore was able to preform a counter curse and she still took over 6 months to rehabilitate. Let alone the curse being intended to actually kill you, Katie just got lucky.
2. This might not be agreed with but love potions. So wrong on so many levels, and it’s sold in Hogsmeade village to third years?! We all know what happens when a person is conceived while a parent is under a love potion- you get Voldemort. Let alone that whole act in itself is rape since the person isn’t actually consenting at all.
3. Not a spell, hex or curse but that blood sucking quill Umbridge uses as torture. How is that not illegal?
4. In a similar vein as Sectumsempra, Diffindo can be used on people and it would be very easy to behead someone with it.
Avada Kedavra is infinitely more humane than Sectumsempra and a lot of other spells. Instant (I think painless) death is much better than getting cut to bits until you just bleed out. Regardless, love potions in particular really bother me. so incredibly violating.
Sectumsempra > Crucio
Crucio is like invisible knives cutting through you but Sectumsempra literally cuts you
I think Obliviate should be banned, with one restriction: civilians and corrupt Ministry staff, who AREN'T using the spell in the course of their duties.
If something happens that shouldn't, say, 2 young wizards taking the enchanted car belonging to one of the parents, and risking the exposure of the entire Wizarding world, the staff member sent to clean up the mess should NOT face prison for carrying out a necessary duty.
However, if a corrupt staff, like Pius Thicknesse for example, should use it to mess with a rival or opponent, he SHOULD be imprisoned.
as i like to quote from an fan fiction "fiendfyre is more like a legal unforgivable. as most users tend to die before being prosecuted"