Is alchemy magic?

It was mired in mysticism and ritual practices.

Yes. In real life, alchemy was as much rooted in mysticism and old metaphysics (not the boring kind like "do we have free will" but extensive, systemized kinds that asserted strange immaterial qualities to things that gave them a "real" existence).

They already had science, Aristotle had already put down the basic ideas of scientific inquiry (as well as a bunch of presocratics that get talked about less like Thales).

Depends on the setting.

My main way of distinguishing would be:
>If anybody follows the same steps do they get the same result?
Science

>If you follow the steps but without a specific genetic or spiritual quirk you do not get the same result.
Magic

>genetic quirk
What's that supposed to mean?

Magic bloodlines or if only 1/1000000 people can do magic for whatever reason. If any schmuck can combine the special herbs and spices then alchemy is not magic. If the person has to be naturally talented, rely on external spirits, or born special to make a potion then alchemy is magic.

Always true. But to this I ask, tell me about your favored settings alchemy.

I fluff it as an art which treats magic as a substance, the main catalyzer for a diversity of effects. Alchemists usually have to make with ingredients with somewhat high magical content, rarely getting hold of pure, physical mana. Other factor is that a collective belief affects the intended result, as well as the alchemist's state of mind.

So it uses magic in a way that magical users don't think of magic as.

Eh, yes and no.

Hermeticism was the start of the philosophical tech tree that ended up being what we call science, but at the start all they had made was the crucial idea that the world, above and below, followed a unified set of laws that we could learn and understand. Nothing happened 'just because'.

This is super important, because until you operate under that assumption 'god(s) did it' is as perfectly a valid answer to why the apple falls as gravity is.

But the scientific method, the rigor of testing and confirming data that is the foundation of modern science, wasn't really refined and put into action until much later in history. Experimentation certainly happened before then, but the confirmation rate was low and sample sizes were often in the single digits, allowing for mistakes misunderstanding and sometimes pure bullshit to cloud meaningful knowledge.

>rarely getting hold of pure, physical mana.
What does that look like, and how do you get it?

...

Well, water usually has more mana than air or earth. So the djinn sultans have a type of giant oyster which makes mana pearls out of filtrated seawater. They use and export a lot of these. They are almost pure, only having the minimum impurities to make it solid.

The nation they mainly export to, has orichalcum. It is a mix of adamant and sea salt which crystallizes when saturated with magic. They use it as batteries, mixed with fractal cages which absorb ambient mana.

Haven't decided if there is 100% pure mana which retains a tangible form.

Please ignore 's weeaboism.

Sounds like your pure mana would be a liquid, and perhaps would evaporate if given the chance.

That's a good insight, thank you. It really works very well within the fluff.

Is friendship magic?

Western Alchemy is just an inferior knockoff of glorious Eastern Alchehestry

Alchemy is to Sorcery as Chemistry is to Physics

Still magic but different discipline

Thick and heavy liquid, that slowly mists away like dry ice.

Alchemy is just applied mathemagics

Are there any specific differences? All I remember is Western Alchemy: try to turn lead to gold and hommunculi ; Eastern Alchemy : Gain Eteernal Life

Literally depends on the setting. It vastly differs, and there doesn't really seem to be a commonly accepted baseline for it, either.

I generally like alchemy that is basically just science except using magical substances.

>Aristotle had already put down the basic ideas of scientific inquiry
That's a load of malakíes. Aristotle held back scientific inquiry for ages, because nobody dared question the Master. The idea of testing one's hypothesis was not part of Aristotle's worldview, yet it's central to science. The Greeks invented/discovered logic. Logic is used in science, but it is not science.
t. half-Greek.

Yes, whose color changes one moment ot the next. I can mix that with the microspiders which weave web-circuits for the sacrocomputers.

Not him, but I can say chinese folklore had a concept of internal alchemy, basically messing with your metabolism (ki included) to achieve effects like immortality.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neidan

Which is I think is neat and plan to mix with acunpucture for some monk NPC in the future, a half-healer/half-fighter to account of lack of clerics in chinese mythology.

Not that guy but Western Alchemy draws power from the kinetic energy from movement of the earth's crust and thermal energy from the magma under it too. It's more suited for large scale environment manipulation and is more physical, combat, and knowledge based.

On the other hand Eastern Alchehestry draws power from the chi or life force from the living things around it. because of that it's more general in what it can do, and it traditionally used for healing. It also changes in power based on the power and energy of those around you instead of a set value. It's more mystical, healing, and spiritual based.

Note this is from the canonical version, Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, I have no idea when it comes to the 2003 version's rules.

Forgot to mention, since Alchehestry used life force it can used ranged transmutations by drawing two runes far away and activating the one that's far away by activating the one you're touching and linking them through chi trails. As oppose to Alchemy where you have to be touching the rune to activate it.

I think protoscience would be a better term for early alchemy.

Yeah, I don't see why not.
Most magic is inspired by early crafts that where poorly understood. Witches could heal and kill because they knew about all sort of herbs that could be poisonous or curative. Shape-shifting and face-changing was cosmetics and disguise. A lot of divination was just having good foresight. Putting enchantments or charms on people is mostly force of personality and psychological head games.

In Tarot the Wand represents a septer (or phallus) like a king would. He waves it around and people follow his command. It's intangible power.
The Pentacle is coin or a rune. A piece of metal becomes engraved with a symbol and suddenly gains value. It's the odd transmutation of a mundane object into a symbol.
In both cases it's getting something: control, pure value, from nothing: a stick, a lumb of metal.

>I guess my point is
Alchemy is nothing special compared to other arcane arts aside from the fact that it's survived in a somewhat recognisable form.

no.
I use it as a vehicle for NOT!=magic
as an origin of monsters in low fantasy
and I use it to make a certain aesthetic

>tell me about your favored settings alchemy
not that user
but the setting that has the best to me is the one from "The Lies of Locke Lamora"

it is these days

more or less

no, it is not, not even close.

it was because it dealt in things unseen and poorly misunderstood.

an alchemist could make Aqua Regia, and dissolve gold with it. but not tell you WHY it did that.

I would say it's more a form of protoscience. If our ancestors didn't have alchemy it wouldn't have eventually evolved into science and we would still be living in the 1700s.

In fact, many of modern day science that we take for granted originated from alchemy. Like the defibrillator. If it wasn't for alchemists experimenting and trying to find ways to revive the dead (which is what inspired the Frankenstein novel) then we wouldn't be able to save heart attack victims today.

You do realize that even the spellcasting kind of magic is sometimes something you can just learn right? It's not even a "IN MY SETTING" thing.
Why would alchemy be different?

Prior to Aristotle alchemists were quite common. They based their practice on the four elements. From there they could create using prayer and those elements. Fire + Water = Steam and such. When Aristotle came into play true science quashed a lot of alchemy as pseudoscience and hogwash. The principles of alchemy are still practiced in science to this day though in that matter is repurposed rather than destroyed.

The way I like to use alchemy in my setting is that if a wizard/sorcerer/witch wants to heal someone they will recite the proper words, wave a magical instrument around, touch them, and then the person is healed.

Where if an alchemist wants to heal someone they will go collect some rare plants or animal ingredients that possess their own magic, distill them down into a potion while removing any harmful/non magical ingredients, then make the person drink it.

Because of this alchemists and magic castors have a strong alliance, culturally speaking, because alchemists can create potions or food recipes that can strongly boost magic users abilities. And magic users have the knowledge/power to get the raw ingredients that alchemists need to craft their goods.

There's also a lot of overlap between alchemists and other schools of education. Because if you want to heal someone you have to know why they are sick, what it is specifically that's making them sick, and therefor what magical ingredients will help them. For instance, a plant that when ground up and then mixed with wet charcoal to make tablets to eat for curing ulcers isn't going to do jack shit for the patient if their chest pains are because they are a fat fuck with veins clogged by cholesterol.

So in my settings it's rare to find someone who is just a wizard, or just a midwife, or just a doctor. Everyone who goes into higher learning has some education in alchemy.

Even architects at least work and trade with alchemists. Sure, it's great being able to make roman cement blocks to build your castle. But alchemists know how to grind the horns of goat unicorn hybrids into a powder that when added to the mixture can transform it into solid soapstone, which is pretty much non porous/waterproof.

Of course it is, why do you think teenage girls form cliques and viciously attack each other via rumors and cruel pranks? It's because they feed off of the magic and guard it more jealously than a dragon guards it's gold.

Its the wizards words for science.
Like natural philosophy.

No, but they're both sciences. As such, they can be used to enhance one another.

>It's not even a "IN MY SETTING" thing.
It kind of is. In the majority of settings, magic is NOT something you can just learn. Either you have the talent and can learn it, or you don't have the talent and you'll never be able to use magic. Even in most D&D settings, the fluff heavily implies that you need some degree of natural talent to become a wizard, even if the rules don't enforce that.

Wizards: anyone can do it, more about status and time spent than ability
Sorcerers: Maybe they're born with it
Bards: Maybe it's maybelline.

I'm not saying it's not very common, just that it's not nearly inherently universal enough that alchemy is somehow automatically not magic if you don't need a magical talent to use it.

You are both right, and wrong. Technically, in D&D/Forgotten Realms literally anyone can learn to do magic. BUT, wether or not you are GOOD and or SUCCESSFUL at it depends entirely on your own dedication/natural talent.

Hence the Harpells.

>mfw Bards don't actually have magic of their own
>mfw all the magic bards use come from either enchanted items like magic boots, or the enchanted make up created for them by alchemists
>mfw bards often duel each other to the death because one won't give up the secrets such as who made their Dire Bat Dung mascara that gives them +20 charisma every time they bat their eyelashes

That's a fucking horrific picture. Worse than some of the gore threads on /b/

kys

Technically correct, good sir. But you can still go fuck yourself.

Why? Lots of make up IRL is made from gross stuff. Just remember if you ever get the chance to kiss a girl, that the ingredient in her lipstick that makes it so glossy is ground up fish scales.

>tastes like true love? no, tastes like dead rotting fish

I think he was just commenting on the picture itself and not your post.
I guess he's never seen a canine open their mouth before.

Oh, thank you for correcting my autism user.