Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Rune Magic vs Glyph Magic


Pathfinder Campaign Setting General Discussion


So I have been scrounging through information related to Earthfall, the Aboleths and the Star Stone and I have noticed that some sources refer to Rune Magic while others refer to Glyph Magic. Are they meant to be used interchangeably? Is one a subset of the other? Are they distnct forms of magic? Is there a specific syntax for what is a Glyph and what is a Rune? The dictionary distinction is basically, both are symbols with agreed upon meaning but runes are specific sets from mostly Germanic roots and depending on which definition you use for glyphs the may or may not specify being inset or etched. I don't think those definitions fit the context of how the terms are used in the game so I would love to have more clarity on this.

Sczarni

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber
ScotchSunrise wrote:
So I have been scrounging through information related to Earthfall, the Aboleths and the Star Stone and I have noticed that some sources refer to Rune Magic while others refer to Glyph Magic. Are they meant to be used interchangeably? Is one a subset of the other? Are they distnct forms of magic? Is there a specific syntax for what is a Glyph and what is a Rune? The dictionary distinction is basically, both are symbols with agreed upon meaning but runes are specific sets from mostly Germanic roots and depending on which definition you use for glyphs the may or may not specify being inset or etched. I don't think those definitions fit the context of how the terms are used in the game so I would love to have more clarity on this.

I think this was gone over in one of the runelords articles, or a panel recorded by Know Direction at a con.... I seem to remember that it was refered to as Glyph magic when Xin and the other Thassilonians worshiped the virtues. When they were corrupted to the sins, the magic was also corrupted, turning it to rune magic.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

dot

The Exchange

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't know if this is necessarily true or not, but I have always thought of glyphs as more complex symbols, while runes are almost a proto-alphabet.


Cpt_kirstov wrote:
ScotchSunrise wrote:
So I have been scrounging through information related to Earthfall, the Aboleths and {...}
I think this was gone over in one of the runelords articles, or a panel recorded by Know Direction at a con.... I seem to remember that it was refered to as Glyph magic when Xin and the other Thassilonians worshiped the virtues. When they were corrupted to the sins, the magic was also corrupted, turning it to rune magic.

If there is already a thread on this topic I could not find it, but it seems like the kind of general knowledge question that was bound to have come up before now, especially with how long RotRL has been around. If this is the case then it would suggest that Glyph magic and Rune magic are different expressions of the same magical source. The thing is, the Aboleths are at times said to have used Rune magic and at other times to have used Glyph magic. Since they were not subject to the same cultural shift in magic doctrine that Thassilon went through after the death of Xin, it is unlikely that their magic underwent any significant change during that time. Is it then fair to assume that the magic of the Aboleths spans the breadth of both what is considered Rune magic and what is considered Glyph magic?


Nathan Nasif wrote:
I don't know if this is necessarily true or not, but I have always thought of glyphs as more complex symbols, while runes are almost a proto-alphabet.

If this were the case then it would seem Glyph magic is the name for any number of unrelated spells across a variety of schools that happen to centre around a magical glyph as the focal point of the spell. That glyph may or may not contain specific runes but would only be Rune magic if the specific spell it was used in happened to fall into that category. If that's so then the term "glyph magic" is about as descriptive as calling something "wand magic" or "implement magic"

Sczarni

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Looking around the Wiki, I could be wrong. It looks like Glyph magic is specifically stolen from the aboliths, Where rune magic seems more built into the 7 sins.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Campaign Setting / General Discussion / Rune Magic vs Glyph Magic All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.