The wand of a focus for their power. The younger kids don't really control their power, it just flies out and randomly effects stuff. As they get older wizards learn to control themselves better so no magical accidents like hat occur, while the best can channel that into doing something specific instead of just random.

And regardless even the wandless magic is far far weaker then magic done with wands.

@Kegisak: I always saw it as the wand being a focusing mechanism; it's possible to cast spells without one, but a wand makes it far easier to control. All other things being equal, I'd assume the wizard with a wand is going to be able to cast more powerful spells more easily than the same wizard without a wand. It's certainly a good idea to learn how to cast spells without one in the event you lose it, but doing so seems to be extremely difficult and time-intensive to learn. It's like saying "why use a car when you could learn how to run 20 miles?" Yes, it's possible to run 20 miles, and it's probably a useful ability to have, but for most people it just isn't worth taking the time to train yourself to be able to do it.

See, that's why I'd figure it would make more sense to teach them without a channeling object first. Firstly, it limits the kind of magic they can use(So maybe Seamus would stop blowing up everything he touches). Second, it gives them the ability to actually control their emotional magic(So Harry wouldn't have blown up his aunt in Prisoner of Azkaban), and thirdly it makes them that much more effective once they do get channeling objects. I certainly understand the desire to expedite the process, but frankly I think Hogwarts could do with a bit of theory anyways. I don't remember how it goes in the books exactly, but in the movies they don't even seem to bother with lessons before throwing them right into the practical stuff. The only teachers who ever bothered to discuss the techniques behind actually making spells effective were Lupin and maybe Flitwick, but even then his 'lesson' focused on the use of a channeling object.

Thing is it's implied that a lot of wizards simply don't have difficulty with that; most students don't go around accidentally flinging dangerous spells, so it's not worth the trouble teaching them in that fashion. Of course it would still make perfect sense to have a side class for those who would find such things worth pursuing.

There's also the fact that we don't know (or at least I don't; it's been years since I read the books) how complicated the theory behind magic is; if magical theory is the equivalent of nuclear physics, trying to start a bunch of eleven-year-olds on it is obviously not going to work very well.

Of course, from a meta-perspective a lot of characters don't do the obvious solutions for things, so it might just be a case of in-universe stupidity.

edited 7th May '13 8:47:21 AM by JapaneseTeeth

Would this be a good time to recomend HP Mo R again?

Actually, they were only doing theory for the first few lessons (I'm not sure how long. The wiki might help).

Yes. Well, at least kill everyone. But in the real world you can't just pull the moon closer anyway. I assume that they've got other magic dealing with not having the moon and planet tear each other apart.

As for how close the moon was, there was a cloud behind it, so the closest point is withing the troposphere.

It's never a good time to recommend Methods of Rationality.

I suppose that's true. Much of the books make liberal use of the rule of drama, which I can accept from a Doylist standpoint(Not that the behaviour of the ministry doesn't give us plenty of Watsonian reason to assume the wizarding world is daft). Plus, I will definitely admit that a book about young Harry going to a school where he learns about the technical aspects of magic and spends hours upon hours keeping a leaf from blowing in the wind(OR something like that)wouldn't be nearly as interesting about a book about young Harry going to a school to learn to fly and shoot fire out of his wand.

@Red: Not a fan? I promised to try it out despite how much I dislike what I hear. I fulfil my promses though, so I'm going to do so.

EDIT:As I said, they did say that their early lessons were boring, but we hear little about them.

edited 7th May '13 8:51:07 AM by Sereg

It's never NOT a good time to recommend Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.

No idea how she did this, but at least she's happy.

It requires a very specific worldview and a high tolerance for a certain personality type, in my opinion.

@kegi: I think you're probably underestimating the difficulty of learning magic without a focus. You aren't really expediting anything if it takes three years of training to reliably cast simple spells with no wand. And for certain classes like transfiguration, where things be dangerous if spells are miscast, having a focus is especially important.

edited 7th May '13 8:56:59 AM by Crowfall

I wonder if this is what unicorns go through.

@ applelight

I'm slowly working on a headcanon that involves this very thing...

That's true. I definitely remember one part of the books where Harry tries to learn incantationless spells, and is having ah ell of a time. I also seem to recall even using an accio spell to summon his wand gives him trouble wandless... Still, even so, I think it would be a good idea to have a mandatory 'wandless magic' class alongside regular classes, or something. Maybe as an elective in year three, at least.

Also, I'd argue that certain classes should be taught REALLY carefully anyways, Transfiguration being one of them.

@Apple: In my headcannon, sort of. The unicorn's horn works as a natural foci; something for them to push and pull the flow through for a desired effect. They still need a lot of practice to affect the flow, but the use of their horn is instinctive. Like wands, a unicron can leanr to use magic without their horn, but it'd be much harder. Of course, unlike in HP, a unicorn who doesn't use his horn can learn to become VASTLY more powerful than one that uses the horn, as they learn to affect the flow more consciously than instinctively.

edited 7th May '13 9:03:59 AM by kegisak

Exactly what I suspected and what I don't have. That said, I made a promise and so I'll keep it.

Today: A magic discussion I don't get.

edited 7th May '13 9:12:15 AM by edvedd

Oh dear, my sympathy for E Ps is rising again. As pegasi learn to fly and Unicorns learn magic and E Ps learn sweet F.A.

Heya guys.

If anything, HP has less to say about it's magic than the show. When it comes down to it, we're only given a handful of actual rules and were left to follow what plot dictates presumably because the viewpoint characters don't know the inner workings of magic.

Not that having vague magic is a bad thing, MLP does it all the time. It's just that I prefer a bit more logic into how it works so we're not forced to taking what plot gives us if only because it's vague enough not to be contradictory .

Another thing to consider, I think, is exactly how unpredictable foci-less spellcasting is for the beginning caster. I mean, it's one thing to try to light a candle and simply fail by accomplishing jack squat. It's another when not having a focus means setting your clothes on fire. Or making the room explode.

That's because EP's don't need to learn. They're born awesome.

Think of EP's as being one of the many inborn magical talents, like polymorphism or parslemouths. They're just born with an inherent knowledge of their gift. Sometimes it's more useful than others, but it's still there regardless. So while little miss unicorn is off studying for years to cast fireball, big Billy the Earth Pony is having a grand old time talking to the garden snake.

-cough-Seamus-cough-.

Seriously, somebody needs to figure out what's up with that kid.

edited 7th May '13 9:18:44 AM by kegisak

Garden snakes are surprisingly verbose.

Ah, that's better. Thanks keggy.

Btw, I proposed a 'dog' pony here the other week and it didn't go down too well. So I'm going to tweak that to make it work.

Rarity has a spell for finding gems in the ground.

I am imagining an earth pony tapping the ground with their hoof to do the same.