this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
1096 points (97.8% liked)

Harry Potter

947 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GabrielBell12fi@lemmy.world 34 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Counter point :- (not to do with American sports -- they are ridiculous)

imagine you're watching a quidditch game where one side has an overwhelmingly good set of chasers. I mean unbelievably good. Far better than the other side. Within five minutes they are 50 points up, and another 30 minutes later they are 250 points up. There is literally no chance of the other side catching them.

Do you really want to sit and watch that? It's like the Brazil - Germany game. After a while you would just be "Stop -- you are hurting them too much. It's getting embarrassing and we are all now going to leave because even the home team wants you to stop"

At least with the snitch it means there is a chance that it'll be evened out.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 47 points 2 weeks ago

so ... at least one vote for pro-frog

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 37 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Conversely, literally every other game becomes meaningless. Catching the snitch gains SO many points. You could literally just play defense and snitch support, and never try and score.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 13 points 2 weeks ago

Remember you also have to catch the snitch to end the game. Otherwise it would just go forever

[–] Little_mouse@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It's worse than that though. The parking lot frog adds a huge, but not impossible, score to your team if you catch it AND it instantly ends the game.

So even if one team is absolutely crushing the other, it's not actually going to even things out unless it is in a very specific range of uneven matches.

Being so overwhelmingly outclassed makes a neat sort of metagame about preventing the parking lot frog from being caught. Though the frog is apparently hard enough to catch even once that defending it is sort of besides the point. Even if the frog hunt suddenly has a second dynamic, it's still taking place pretty much completely outside of the view of the audience.

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

Turns out she wasn't great at designing an actual game. Among other things...

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The snitch isn't completely out of view of the audience though. And I think that's kind of the point. The audience can see every fight between seekers for the snitch. This happens at the world cup, and at the matches between Slytherin and Gryffindor in the books. A good set of chasers and beaters can be countered by a good seeker and a good keeper.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Ya I’m curious Lil M @Little_mouse@lemmy.ca about how you imagine the typical seeker flight paths in context of the stadium, obviously no “wrong” answer :)

[–] Little_mouse@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

I'm being a bit hyperbolic, but I seem to recall them describing the snitch as 'basically invisible' and the players flying under the bleachers and into the stratosphere in pursuit of it. Those might be exceptions, maybe the frog only sometimes wanders out into the parking lot.

[–] heavydust@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Another counter point: it's a book for children.

And another again: "In episode 2F09 when Itchy plays Scratchy’s skeleton like a xylophone..."

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

I'm sorry, but I hate this excuse. Bad writing is bad writing. Hand-waving away something that just straight-up doesn't make sense because it's "for children" is lazy. Also, saying a 30-second throwaway gag on a show-within-a-show is the same as the thousands of pages of YA lore in the series Rowling spent over a decade writing is obviously a false equivalency.