Why did the EU agree to delay the Brexit deadline?

How can I check how many times an iPhone or iPad has been charged?

Offered money to buy a house, seller is asking for more to cover gap between their listing and mortgage owed

Varistor? Purpose and principle

How do we rationalize a person's sins being solely their own when we have traditions that blame entire nations for certain acts?

Why has "pence" been used in this sentence, not "pences"?

Interest Rate Futures Question from Hull, 8e

A social experiment. What is the worst that can happen?

Create all possible words using a set or letters

Do the concepts of IP address and network interface not belong to the same layer?

What is this type of notehead called?

anything or something to eat

Is a file system driver implemented using a kernel module in Linux?

Is there a name for this algorithm to calculate the concentration of a mixture of two solutions containing the same solute?

What's the difference between 違法 and 不法?

Can a Necromancer Reuse the corpses left behind from slain Undead?

How should I respond when I lied about my education and the company finds out through background check?

Could the E-bike drivetrain wear down till needing replacement after 400 km?

MAXDOP Settings for SQL Server 2014

Python script not running correctly when launched with crontab

Journal losing indexing services

How can Trident be so inexpensive? Will it orbit Triton or just do a (slow) flyby?

Is a model fitted to data or is data fitted to a model?

What is the gram­mat­i­cal term for “‑ed” words like these?

How can Newt cast Accio on a Niffler when it is only supposed to work on inanimate objects? [duplicate]

Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?How can they see Harry's invisibility cloak when they are not wearing it?How can electricity not work at Hogwarts?Can Harry Potter's Invisibility Cloak hide inanimate objects/Non-sentient beings?What would happen when you cast spells meant for objects on humans?If no spell can reawaken the dead, how did the resurrection stone work?How does the Accio spell work?If Magical Curses in Harry Potter only work on humans and other tangible objects, how did Voldemort curse the DADA position, if it was intangible?Can you transfigure animate objects into inanimate objects?Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?How quickly do objects summoned by Accio fly?

12

This question already has an answer here:

• 
  Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
  
  1 answer
  
  

Accio is not supposed to work on people or creatures as per this source:

Why couldn’t Newt use ‘Accio’ to retrieve all his beasts?

‘Accio’ only works on inanimate objects. While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.

JK Rowling’s New Website

Yet in the new film Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Newt casts 'Accio' on a Niffler to get it back to him. He specifically says 'Accio Niffler'.

Doesn’t this break the rules set by JK?

harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald

share|improve this question

edited Mar 19 at 21:20

Bellatrix

77.4k15332386

asked Mar 18 at 16:13

GamerGyppsGamerGypps

27510

marked as duplicate by Alex harry-potter
Users with the  harry-potter badge can single-handedly close harry-potter questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();

);
);
);
Mar 18 at 22:35

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

• 
  
  
  

  
  13
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
  
  – TheLethalCarrot
  Mar 18 at 16:14
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
  
  – GamerGypps
  Mar 18 at 16:23
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  5
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
  
  – Virusbomb
  Mar 18 at 16:30
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
  
  – Alex
  Mar 18 at 16:36
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
  
  – Valorum
  Mar 18 at 16:50
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

12

This question already has an answer here:

• 
  Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
  
  1 answer
  
  

Accio is not supposed to work on people or creatures as per this source:

Why couldn’t Newt use ‘Accio’ to retrieve all his beasts?

‘Accio’ only works on inanimate objects. While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.

JK Rowling’s New Website

Yet in the new film Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Newt casts 'Accio' on a Niffler to get it back to him. He specifically says 'Accio Niffler'.

Doesn’t this break the rules set by JK?

harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald

share|improve this question

edited Mar 19 at 21:20

Bellatrix

77.4k15332386

asked Mar 18 at 16:13

GamerGyppsGamerGypps

27510

marked as duplicate by Alex harry-potter
Users with the  harry-potter badge can single-handedly close harry-potter questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();

);
);
);
Mar 18 at 22:35

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

• 
  
  
  

  
  13
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
  
  – TheLethalCarrot
  Mar 18 at 16:14
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
  
  – GamerGypps
  Mar 18 at 16:23
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  5
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
  
  – Virusbomb
  Mar 18 at 16:30
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
  
  – Alex
  Mar 18 at 16:36
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
  
  – Valorum
  Mar 18 at 16:50
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

This question already has an answer here:

• 
  Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
  
  1 answer
  
  

Accio is not supposed to work on people or creatures as per this source:

Why couldn’t Newt use ‘Accio’ to retrieve all his beasts?

‘Accio’ only works on inanimate objects. While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.

JK Rowling’s New Website

Yet in the new film Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Newt casts 'Accio' on a Niffler to get it back to him. He specifically says 'Accio Niffler'.

Doesn’t this break the rules set by JK?

harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald

share|improve this question

edited Mar 19 at 21:20

Bellatrix

77.4k15332386

asked Mar 18 at 16:13

GamerGyppsGamerGypps

27510

share|improve this question

edited Mar 19 at 21:20

Bellatrix

77.4k15332386

asked Mar 18 at 16:13

GamerGyppsGamerGypps

27510

share|improve this question

edited Mar 19 at 21:20

Bellatrix

77.4k15332386

asked Mar 18 at 16:13

GamerGyppsGamerGypps

27510

edited Mar 19 at 21:20

Bellatrix

77.4k15332386

edited Mar 19 at 21:20

Bellatrix

77.4k15332386

asked Mar 18 at 16:13

GamerGyppsGamerGypps

27510

asked Mar 18 at 16:13

GamerGyppsGamerGypps

27510

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

20

Accio has been used on creatures before.

In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.

“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’

Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)}}

Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.

“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’

There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)}}

Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 18 at 22:37

answered Mar 18 at 16:42

BellatrixBellatrix

77.4k15332386

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
  
  – only_pro
  Mar 18 at 21:26
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
  
  – atayenel
  Mar 18 at 21:29
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
  
  – Sycorax
  Mar 18 at 22:14
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.

Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.

Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 20 at 15:04

TheLethalCarrot

48k18257304

answered Mar 18 at 16:34

KaiKai

5,1801928

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
  
  – Paul Johnson
  Mar 20 at 21:24
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

20

Accio has been used on creatures before.

In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.

“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’

Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)}}

Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.

“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’

There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)}}

Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 18 at 22:37

answered Mar 18 at 16:42

BellatrixBellatrix

77.4k15332386

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
  
  – only_pro
  Mar 18 at 21:26
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
  
  – atayenel
  Mar 18 at 21:29
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
  
  – Sycorax
  Mar 18 at 22:14
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

20

Accio has been used on creatures before.

In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.

“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’

Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)}}

Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.

“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’

There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)}}

Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 18 at 22:37

answered Mar 18 at 16:42

BellatrixBellatrix

77.4k15332386

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
  
  – only_pro
  Mar 18 at 21:26
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
  
  – atayenel
  Mar 18 at 21:29
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
  
  – Sycorax
  Mar 18 at 22:14
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Accio has been used on creatures before.

In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.

“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’

Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)}}

Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.

“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’

There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
_{^{- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)}}

Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 18 at 22:37

answered Mar 18 at 16:42

BellatrixBellatrix

77.4k15332386

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 18 at 22:37

answered Mar 18 at 16:42

BellatrixBellatrix

77.4k15332386

answered Mar 18 at 16:42

BellatrixBellatrix

77.4k15332386

answered Mar 18 at 16:42

BellatrixBellatrix

77.4k15332386

4

I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.

Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.

Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 20 at 15:04

TheLethalCarrot

48k18257304

answered Mar 18 at 16:34

KaiKai

5,1801928

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
  
  – Paul Johnson
  Mar 20 at 21:24
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.

Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.

Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 20 at 15:04

TheLethalCarrot

48k18257304

answered Mar 18 at 16:34

KaiKai

5,1801928

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
  
  – Paul Johnson
  Mar 20 at 21:24
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.

Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.

Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 20 at 15:04

TheLethalCarrot

48k18257304

answered Mar 18 at 16:34

KaiKai

5,1801928

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 20 at 15:04

TheLethalCarrot

48k18257304

answered Mar 18 at 16:34

KaiKai

5,1801928

edited Mar 20 at 15:04

TheLethalCarrot

48k18257304

edited Mar 20 at 15:04

TheLethalCarrot

48k18257304

answered Mar 18 at 16:34

KaiKai

5,1801928

answered Mar 18 at 16:34

KaiKai

5,1801928