Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bohandas]

3- The turning of base metals into gold.  This one was practiced by charlatans who wanted to get money out of gullible Kings, and this money was usually put to the use of pursuing either types 1 or 2 above.

Actually, this is connected with 1. Of course, there were charlatans, but the whole point of turning things into gold wasn't money. Gold doesn't rust natutally (only mercury and aqua regia can corrode it, as far as I remember), so it was a symbol of perfection. Alchemists thought that finding a way to turn other metals into gold would lead them to a way to stop any form of what at the time was called "corruption" in men too, which includes diseases, death, moral decline (yeah, they were somewhat clueless about the distinction between phisical and metaphisical world), etc.

Which in turn relates to the second, less well known, main goal of alchemy, which was to develop a single substance that would cure all diseases (the "panacea").

[Jeoshua]

Can we all just agree that if Alchemy goes into the game, that it obviously will actually do something? Reguardless of how fake real world people that tried to turn lead into gold ended up being, if it goes in it obviously isn't quite as fake as in our world.

I think, however, that lead into gold is pretty boring as a skill, and buffing potions are even more boring.  Not dwarfy at all, either way you slice it.

However, having chemistry which is called alchemy, and creates useful chemogadgets like black powder and extracts titanium from rutile... these are dwarfy and fit the feel of this game.

[Supercharazad]

Yes, you can do that but that is not alchemy. That is nucleas physics. The mians invented it arround 1000AD. 

The point here is that the strangemetal that they invent will be some speccial sort of metal. Perhaps more valuable or perhaps stronger than others. Either way, it would be fun. Also, other forts shouldnt be able to make the supermetal/whateverstuff. That way the world would have a limmited ammount of buggermetal spears.

Magic is science we don't understand yet. Alchemy was chemistry we didn't understand then.

Physics, Chemistry and Biology are all the same once you get to the small bits.

[devek]

Magic is science we don't understand yet. Alchemy was chemistry we didn't understand then.

That is soooooo wrong.

Might as well say astrology is astronomy that we don't understand yet and that voodoo was medicine we didn't understand then.

[Jeoshua]

Might as well say astrology is astronomy that we don't understand yet and that voodoo was medicine we didn't understand then.

Am I the only one who fails to see how this is disagreeing in any way?  Because they were those things.  Voodoo maybe not since it's modern, but witchdoctoring in general, yes, was medicine before we understood things like germ theory and psychosis.

Am I to understand, devek, that since we have better things in modern day that better represent various branches of science, that the olden time equivalents are, in your mind, not merely poor imitations of poorly understood things... but outright lies, even in their own time?

I think the original point you're disagreeing with is correct, if you misread it a bit.  The contention is not that magic is something we don't understand.  It's that things that were once magical become understood eventually as they mature.  Alchemy is "baby-chemistry" in this way, just as Astrology is an early form of Astronomy that arose before we truly understood the universe at large in any way.

Or, the contention could be that if we took actual Science back to the middle ages, people would view it as Magic.

[loose nut]

Alchemy could maybe do something with those barrels of blood and ichor you can currently get in the game. Make 'em into a magical power source (ie for gears and pumps and such) by infusing the parts with animal spirits. Or make them into beverages that nobles use to extend their lifespan (they could demand such things). Or tell the future (is a siege coming? or is it rhesus macaques?) That's relatively dwarfy.

[Jeoshua]

I don't think telling the future is possible, let alone Dwarfy.  Dwarves are technically minded, metallurgical, gem-loving, mechanist artificters.  Spirits, immortality, and divination do not spring to my mind in any way when I think of Dwarves. Classicly, Dwarves know nothing about magic at all.  Maybe some religious stuff creeps into their mentalities, but magic does not.  Either they understand how something works, or they deem it useless.

Not that using the blood as a reagent wouldn't be possible, just I don't think they'd use it for "magic"

[harborpirate]

I don't disagree that alchemy should be reproducible once "formulas" are discovered, but what they do should definitely be magical even to us and not just the science we already know. That would be really boring.

[Jeoshua]

But why would Dwarves engage in magic at all?  That would be a serious break from decades upon decades of Dwarven RPG tradition.  When given the choice between magic and technology, Dwarves routinely go for tech.

Look at this game.  We have artifacts that don't have any magical bent, mechanisms which are totally mechanical, etc etc.  The most magical thing a Dwarf knows about is Magma, and they put it to good use.  They might call it "The Lifeblood of Armok" but fundamentally it's just hot liquid rock they use to heat things quickly and in style.

Elven alchemy might be completely magical and spiritually based... but Dwarves just don't seem to have a magic bone in their stubby bodies.

So I'm officially on record as being pro-chemistry and anti-magic for Dwarven Alchemists.

[harborpirate]

Toady has already stated that there will be magic in the game, and that he is not in favor of magic that can easily be exploited like in your typical RPG. So I don't think there's any reason to fear that there might be something like fireball spamming. I guess in previous versions, artifacts had magical powers, and they just haven't gotten back in yet. I'd expect magical effects for artifacts to be the first sort of magic to creep back into the game. If alchemy came in as the science we know then I'll be very disappointed, as it would be an opportunity lost to make the later game interesting.

I like the post that mentioned that this would be a great way to use some of the useless junk we have in the game now, like blood and ichor barrels.

[loose nut]

Eh, maybe future-telling ought to be out of the scope of "alchemy" as such... I'm just throwing stuff out there, so how about incorporating alchemy + blood into wards ("badgers shall avoid this gate" – setting traffic restrictions for non-dwarves basically) or into – let's say a chamber is treated with alchemical alligator blood, which your fisherdwarves pass through, and are endowed with an affinity that lets them ignore the alligators in the river. Or, if dwarves ever create homonculi or automatons, alchemy + animal blood can be part of the process.

As far as dwarves and magic goes, DF already deviates a fair bit from standard D&D tropes (DF elves especially) so I don't see that dwarves need to be 100% nonmagical. DF dwarves don't do magic because magic isn't in the game (except as monsters that will kill you).

[devek]

Might as well say astrology is astronomy that we don't understand yet and that voodoo was medicine we didn't understand then.

Am I the only one who fails to see how this is disagreeing in any way?  Because they were those things.  Voodoo maybe not since it's modern, but witchdoctoring in general, yes, was medicine before we understood things like germ theory and psychosis.

Astronomy is the science of studying celestial objects. Astrology is predicting the future based off the position of stars.
Modern medicine treats conditions based off empirical evidence. Witchdoctors treat conditions caused by witchcraft.

The science collects evidence to form a conclusion, while the pseudoscience forms a conclusion and seeks or falsifies evidence to prove it.

See the difference?

Am I to understand, devek, that since we have better things in modern day that better represent various branches of science, that the olden time equivalents are, in your mind, not merely poor imitations of poorly understood things... but outright lies, even in their own time?

Wrong. In the second century Eratosthenes figured out the world was round, its approximate size, its tilt, and approximate distance to the sun without leaving Egypt just by putting a stick in the ground. That's science! Science's understanding of the world's size and such became more accurate once more data was available, but nothing was a lie and none of the data was flawed(yes, he understood there was a margin of error in his readings at the time).

When the church tried to force scientist to find data that supported THEIR belief that the universe revolved around the Earth, that wasn't science but outright lies scientist had to risk their life to correct.

See the difference?

I think the original point you're disagreeing with is correct, if you misread it a bit.  The contention is not that magic is something we don't understand.  It's that things that were once magical become understood eventually as they mature.

No, nothing is or ever was magic. Yes, someone might believe their toaster is magic. Yes, some things are not well understood but anyone who is claiming or has ever claimed to practice magic is a con artist period. This is as true today as it was a thousand years ago. If someone truly found a way to do something magical, they themselves would want to understand it and undergo scientific scrutiny which reminds me of the story of http://www.damninteresting.com/clever-hans-the-math-horse

Alchemy is "baby-chemistry" in this way, just as Astrology is an early form of Astronomy that arose before we truly understood the universe at large in any way.

Wrong. Alchemist were "con artist" period. During their time, they were modern day followers of hermetism. The current modern day followers would be the members of the "new thought movement" (Have you seen, "the secret" or "what the BLEEP do we know"?) I sincerely hope you don't think those guys are baby-physicists and see them for the con they are.

Or, the contention could be that if we took actual Science back to the middle ages, people would view it as Magic.

Today there are people who think microwaves ovens are magic, but if you take it back to the middle ages scientist are going to have a lot of questions for you. That has never changed.

Sorry if I am being a dick, I just find the equation of pseudoscience to science as offensive as a christian would find someone peeing on a bible. If you want dwarfs who practice magical alchemy and having power of mind over matter that is ok, but please please please please please don't equate it to chemistry in real life.

alchemy

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

0 things supported by evidence

chemistry
*imagine periodic table here*
everything supported by evidence

[Jeoshua]

Astronomy is the science of studying celestial objects. Astrology is predicting the future based off the position of stars.

MODERN Astrology is this.  More ancient astrology grew out of the desire to figure out the best times to plant crops and explain the movements of the objects in the heavens.  Both of these goals could be seen as "predicting the future".  Some people just thought they could extend it out a little farther than that, tho... which is where it breaks down.

The statement on Witchdoctors is just wrong.  With the understanding that the witchdoctor using various herbs to drive out "unclean spirits", it was an early form of medicine that wasn't all that well informed.  Doesn't mean it didn't work from time to time, tho.  And what seemed to work was used again.  That's what you are calling "emperical evidence".  Over time it became actual medicine, but in its early stages it was all about spirits and magic.  Those things that worked were passed down to the students of the witchdoctor, those things that didn't work usually were not (although sometimes they were, and sometimes the witchdoctor died before teaching anyone anything).

What you're saying is basically like saying "Babies can't talk.  See? They babble and it's not actually words."  When we all know eventually they will talk, they just don't have a complete grasp on the situation yet.

Wrong. In the second century Eratosthenes figured out the world was round, its approximate size, its tilt, and approximate distance to the sun without leaving Egypt just by putting a stick in the ground.

And the Ancient Egyptians and Aztecs and Mayans et al figured it out even sooner than that.  That really doesn't prove anything tho, as nobody was contending anything about a flat earth in this thread.  Straw man argument.

See the difference?

All I see there is a supposition that the Church held people back.  Although I would like to comment that our view of "progress" isn't as we might otherwise think.  We like to think of history as a progression from early barbaric times, through dark ages, into the modern enlightened era.  Nothing could be further from the truth, actually.

Not saying that you were saying that, but this thread has just made me think of it.

I think the original point you're disagreeing with is correct, if you misread it a bit.  The contention is not that magic is something we don't understand.  It's that things that were once magical become understood eventually as they mature.

Wrong. Alchemist were "con artist" period. During their time, they were modern day followers of hermetism.

You're talking about European Alchemists in the early Rennaisance/Dark Ages, right?
I'm talking about the Arabian wise men that they were ripping off. The ones where the word "Chemistry" came from, out of "Al Khemia".  I think that's the biggest point of disagreement we're at here.

Sorry if I am being a dick,

You're not.

If you want dwarfs who practice magical alchemy and having power of mind over matter that is ok,

I don't

but please please please please please don't equate it to chemistry in real life.

I wasn't

Wikipedia has a good article on ISlamic Alchemy.  Basically it starts as objective study, and ends up being misconstrued as it filters into Europe.

[devek]

Astronomy is the science of studying celestial objects. Astrology is predicting the future based off the position of stars.

MODERN Astrology is this.  More ancient astrology grew out of the desire to figure out the best times to plant crops and explain the movements of the objects in the heavens.  Both of these goals could be seen as "predicting the future".  Some people just thought they could extend it out a little farther than that, tho... which is where it breaks down.

If you're predicting the seasons using empirical evidence it is astronomy, by definition. Such claims are falsifiable and scientifically valid. Where it breaks down is where it becomes astrology, by definition.

The statement on Witchdoctors is just wrong.  With the understanding that the witchdoctor using various herbs to drive out "unclean spirits", it was an early form of medicine that wasn't all that well informed.  Doesn't mean it didn't work from time to time, tho.  And what seemed to work was used again.  That's what you are calling "emperical evidence".

That is the very opposite of empirical evidence. I'm not a medical doctor, but science tells me that method of research is flawed. When you consider that the "treatment" only has to work once(work meaning the patient didn't die) for the "doctor" to develop a confirmation bias it is no surprise that things like bloodletting were standard medical practice until science challenged the notion. Furthermore, even if a primitive medicine actually worked for one case how many medicines out there are harmful and even fatal when used improperly?
 

In the second century Eratosthenes figured out the world was round, its approximate size, its tilt, and approximate distance to the sun without leaving Egypt just by putting a stick in the ground.

And the Ancient Egyptians and Aztecs and Mayans et al figured it out even sooner than that.  That really doesn't prove anything tho, as nobody was contending anything about a flat earth in this thread.  Straw man argument.

Eratosthenes was the ancient Egyptian you speak of I wasn't intending for that to come off as a straw man or talk about the round earth deniers, I was just trying to say that science isn't a new thing and has been valid as long as it has been practiced.

You're talking about European Alchemists in the early Rennaisance/Dark Ages, right?

Ya, when in doubt we're talking about Europe. I don't know much about arabic/chinese science or fraud, except when it was introduced to my own culture hehe. If the european alchemist ripped off arabs in order to rip off fellow europeans, that would make them better con artist than I originally thought   Though one point of interest, arabs wouldn't refer to themselves as alchemist since erm they don't have that word? Wouldn't that be a horrible translation of whatever they called themselves, if they were not like alchemist at all?

Wikipedia has a good article on ISlamic Alchemy.  Basically it starts as objective study, and ends up being misconstrued as it filters into Europe.

I should probably learn more about that part of the world anyway, I will hit it up.

[Jeoshua]

Zosimos is basically the man we have to "thank" for Alchemy as we've been (mis)understanding it.  Before him, there were those who believed that base metals into gold was possible, and tried many an experiment to try to do it, since their theories said it might work.  After Zosimos, however, Alchemy became as we know it today.

Heres a thought on Alchemy as it might pertain to DF:

Elven Alchemy - Zosimos would be proud.  Basically the search for enlightenment, trying to find the philosopher's stone, etc.  Elves have long long lives and can afford to engage in this kind of nonesense.  Little to no practical use, as it's basically religious in nature.

Human Alchemy - "I am teh alkemizt! I will make teh goldz for joo!"  Charlatans, appointed by greedy Kings.  Maybe the best of them figure something out.  Most likely, however, turning lead into gold will take a healthy infusion of money for it to work.  So in a way, it works.  Or least "turning lead into gold" leads to gold for the alchemist in question.

Dwarven Alchemy - Practical, honest, scientific chemistry.  Focused on such things as "transmutation of unsmeltable ore into metals", creating black powder or other chemogadgets, and other real world applications.  Dwarves are the most practical of beings, if anything.

Goblin Alchemy - Not applicable.