It depends on what you define infusion as. Three big theme of magic versus tech isn’t that magic stops existing, but that tech radically changes the balance of power in how to use magic. To use a fire wizard as an example, the best use of a fire wizard is different between the medieval era and industrial era.
For the medieval era, the best use of a fire wizard is as magical artillery. Sieges are likely broken as the attacking army has enough fire power from their wizards to burn away defenders in a castle. You likely need these wizards to understand strategy, so they will likely be generals or kings. A fire wizard is going to have a high status in society.
For the industrial era, the best use of a fire wizard is as a replacement for coal. Weapons on the battlefield have replaced the need of fire wizards and some weapons have enough range to be a threat to the wizards, negating their need. Instead, a fire wizard is either used to melt metal or to power a steam engine because they are cheaper than using coal. At best, a fire wizard is going to be at the level of skilled labor in this society as their efforts are best used to be an energy supply.
That shift in power is going to have major ramifications on societies.
Good points. My thought is that in an industrial age, magic users would come to the same conclusion as everyone else—that wealth is now firmly the truest source of political and social power. In my world, fire wizard labor wouldn’t be cheaper than coal—especially coming from an age where they held nobility status. Rather, they would become the most elite scientists and engineers, helping to magically enhance its efficacy. In fact, they may well be the ones to push for it in the first place, as any fire wizard offering magically-enhanced coal in place of traditional in-person wizards or mundane coal would blast their competitors away because of economies of scale. I think it would generally mirror what happened in our world, just with the fact of x + magic = x but better tacked on to everything.
But why would a fire wizard become a metallurgist?
First, the development of martial technologies that negate the use of a fire wizard likely wouldn’t be developed by a fire wizard. Instead, it would likely be developed by people trying to engage in war without the use of a fire wizard.
Second, the people in charge of tending the fires at a steel mill weren’t the people designing new alloys at said steel mill. For throughput reasons, you wouldn’t want your R&D team having to man the production line. The technae involved in making something hot is different than the technae of creating a strong metal. A factory owner would want to keep the two jobs separate.
I have no doubt that there would be those trying to make technologies that negate the need for magic, and I’m sure that many would see success in such endeavors. However, I think that regardless of they invent, someone else will then come along and make the same thing, but further enhanced with magic in some novel fashion. In my mind, magic isn’t inherently special, it’s just another set of technologies that, like any other, allow the leveraging properties of the natural world to accomplish a task more efficiently.
Secondly, the roles of production and R&D would be separate only if the scale of production is large enough. I’m thinking this would start at the local blacksmith level, where working the forge and creating new alloys may absolutely be done by the same person (or team) who is passionate about their craft. If the world jumped directly from that era to the factory era overnight, you’re absolutely correct that the evolution of a wizard from worker to researcher doesn’t make much sense. But, that’s not how society evolves—it’s a gradual process. And I think that in an environment of gradual evolution, those that understand the most fundamental secrets of the craft on an intuitive level from the beginning often end up being near the top of the food chain in the end.
I think perhaps also the scale I have in mind is just smaller than what you’re imagining, which could lead to our differing views. Neither is more or less correct I don’t think. 🙃
It depends on what you define infusion as. Three big theme of magic versus tech isn’t that magic stops existing, but that tech radically changes the balance of power in how to use magic. To use a fire wizard as an example, the best use of a fire wizard is different between the medieval era and industrial era.
For the medieval era, the best use of a fire wizard is as magical artillery. Sieges are likely broken as the attacking army has enough fire power from their wizards to burn away defenders in a castle. You likely need these wizards to understand strategy, so they will likely be generals or kings. A fire wizard is going to have a high status in society.
For the industrial era, the best use of a fire wizard is as a replacement for coal. Weapons on the battlefield have replaced the need of fire wizards and some weapons have enough range to be a threat to the wizards, negating their need. Instead, a fire wizard is either used to melt metal or to power a steam engine because they are cheaper than using coal. At best, a fire wizard is going to be at the level of skilled labor in this society as their efforts are best used to be an energy supply.
That shift in power is going to have major ramifications on societies.
Good points. My thought is that in an industrial age, magic users would come to the same conclusion as everyone else—that wealth is now firmly the truest source of political and social power. In my world, fire wizard labor wouldn’t be cheaper than coal—especially coming from an age where they held nobility status. Rather, they would become the most elite scientists and engineers, helping to magically enhance its efficacy. In fact, they may well be the ones to push for it in the first place, as any fire wizard offering magically-enhanced coal in place of traditional in-person wizards or mundane coal would blast their competitors away because of economies of scale. I think it would generally mirror what happened in our world, just with the fact of
x + magic = x but bettertacked on to everything.But why would a fire wizard become a metallurgist?
First, the development of martial technologies that negate the use of a fire wizard likely wouldn’t be developed by a fire wizard. Instead, it would likely be developed by people trying to engage in war without the use of a fire wizard.
Second, the people in charge of tending the fires at a steel mill weren’t the people designing new alloys at said steel mill. For throughput reasons, you wouldn’t want your R&D team having to man the production line. The technae involved in making something hot is different than the technae of creating a strong metal. A factory owner would want to keep the two jobs separate.
I have no doubt that there would be those trying to make technologies that negate the need for magic, and I’m sure that many would see success in such endeavors. However, I think that regardless of they invent, someone else will then come along and make the same thing, but further enhanced with magic in some novel fashion. In my mind, magic isn’t inherently special, it’s just another set of technologies that, like any other, allow the leveraging properties of the natural world to accomplish a task more efficiently.
Secondly, the roles of production and R&D would be separate only if the scale of production is large enough. I’m thinking this would start at the local blacksmith level, where working the forge and creating new alloys may absolutely be done by the same person (or team) who is passionate about their craft. If the world jumped directly from that era to the factory era overnight, you’re absolutely correct that the evolution of a wizard from worker to researcher doesn’t make much sense. But, that’s not how society evolves—it’s a gradual process. And I think that in an environment of gradual evolution, those that understand the most fundamental secrets of the craft on an intuitive level from the beginning often end up being near the top of the food chain in the end.
I think perhaps also the scale I have in mind is just smaller than what you’re imagining, which could lead to our differing views. Neither is more or less correct I don’t think. 🙃