Creature Types in Magic: The Gathering: On the Origin of Multiverse Species

Magic: The Gathering universe is filled with scholars, wizards, scientists. Every plane has institutions of research and some hobbyists. It is even more concerning that the state of Magic taxonomy is pretty grim. I thought it is high time to look into the meanders of the multiverse’s creatures and finally propose some sort of structure to their tree of life (not the card). Each Magic card has a creature type and as much as some types are unknown to our earthly science, many are animals we know and love. This article will try to summarise the fauna of multiverse and propose the Magic tree of life akin to the one proposed in the 19th century on Earth [Darwin, 1859].

In order to write this anthology, I studied extensively what we know about the fauna of the multiverse, focusing on the clades that are considered non-sapient. And yes, there are talking rhinos on New Capenna, but that might be a side effect of all the Halo. I decided to lean on earthly taxonomy when analysing the multiverse as we have created a very good system starting with a clear binomial nomenclature [Linnaeus, 1753] through the development of taxonomy [de Candole, 1813; Bentham& Hooker, 1862] concept of phyletic systems [Eichler, 1883] through the modern taxonomy based on genetic similarity [Woese et. al, 1990]. But not all the groups are existing or extant on Earth, so several categories will have to be arbitrarily assigned. Of note I didn’t dabble in taxonomy of sentient species – I am way smarter than making such statement with bunch of fundamentalist clerics in every plane and race – don’t want to end persecuted as a heretic by the Ebon Order or the Tel-Jillad tree huggers.

I separated 90 species categories into 4 broader groups: Invertebrates, non-mammalian vertebrates, mammals and hybrid species. The latter is a group encompassing species that result from hybridisation of multicellular species, a process not existing on Earth, but allegedly possible elsewhere when genomes of multiple far related species merge creating a species combining the characteristics of both groups. An example will be Pegasus – combination of a horse and a bird.

As a result of this division, the multiverse tree of life has 41 types of mammals, 19 non-mammalian vertebrates, 22 invertebrates and 8 hybrid species.

Prokaryotes

Astonishingly, despite figuring out how does the interplanar travel work and generating machines that would put our engineers to shame, the inhabitants of the multiverse didn’t seem to discover bacteria. No wonder Melira dies of an infected wound, where antibiotics would probably help to combat the infection long enough for wollowollo healing to become effective.

Invertebrates

Although invertebrates are not as spineless as Brokers’ tax advisors, they do not have a physical backbone nor a spinal chord. And yet they still are plentiful across every plane. The scholars of the multiverse did a pretty good job in identifying multiple groups:

Despite their, I am sure, good intentions, the naturalists of the multiverse made a dogs breakfast out of worm classification. Nematodes , flatworms and annelids are very different from each other. But not in the eyes of Tolarian scholars it seems. The highest level of granularity they managed to muster is swapping “o” for a “u” if the worm is veeery big. But flat or not – that doesn’t bother them so much. Heck, some Wurms look suspiciously reptillian while others have clear characteristics of invertebrates. This is just the first of many examples of sloppy approach towards biology from the so called sages. Interestingly, they did feel to put leeches in a separate category. the only rationale for that I can imagine is “sucky bloody = different”. Still nice of them to separate sponges, jellyfish and starfish. And to do some more in-depth work on the Molluscs and Arthropods.

After seeing gazillion types of wurms from clearly distinct clades clumped in to one hot mess, to the point I started to think maybe wurm is not a kind of a creature but a job, it comes as a surprise how detailed the tree of molluscs is. Yes, only one bivalve is a bit surprising and makes me question the authenticity of the pearls in the Pearl Trident, but we have 2 types of gastropods and 4 types of cephalopods. Here was also the first time I encountered a problem of having to deal with creatures unknown to Earth biology. But the slug-like form of the Spikes and parasitic intelligence of the Licids made me quite confident in their designations.

But my newly find respect towards the multiversal taxonomists quickly vanished when I looked at the arthropods. Impressive that they kept trilobites separate but seriously guys. Insects? All 217 of them in one bag? That’s it? You have to be blind not to see the differences. Even more blind when the insects are larger than a skyscraper like the Giant Ankheg. The insect taxonomy bundles Coleoptera and Lepidotera in one big chunk, doesn’t care about their life cycle stage – who cares? Not multiverse scholars, that’s who. I do admit having to collect the specimens with a skyship and harpoon poses more difficulty than frolicking around the meadows with a net, but hey, we don’t have magic to help on Earth.

After the incompetence and neglect on the insect front, it was surprising that as many as three types of arachnids are recognised by the scholars. But having been in science long enough, I know exactly how do such things work – most likely some arachnid aficionado on a Lolth Research Fellow Programme combined their hobby with a cushy salary and overdid it just to make the insect “scholars” look like buffoons. Which, arguably, was not that hard.

Oh. Yeah. Crustatians in multiverse are exclusively crabs. Guess Jetmir ate all the lobsters. Clearly the homarids are not into science.

Vertebrates

OK, invertebrates are small and yucky, so maybe the scholars did a better job at the creatures more like them (which can mean anything in multiverse to be fair). How did they fare here?

Start is not promising. Separating fish into Sharks and Fish is not taxonomy. It looks more as “taxonomy as seen on discovery Channel”. And even here they messed up big time. Deepglow Skate is a fish, despite skates being close relatives of sharks and miles away of bone fish. Same with all the mantas. Maybe they should get some tutorials from Elesh Norn on how to distinguish bone from cartilage? Quagmire Lamprey, despite clearly being a jawless vertebrate is somehow a fish. At least it is not a wurm.

Much better work on amphibians, with a correct division into frogs and salamanders. Pests resemble salamanders, so I classified them as close relatives, however with no DNA to make a proper phylogeny, I am limited to anatomical similarities. If you visited Strixhaven recently and have any pest DNA, PM me.

Much better job was done on reptiles.

Here we do have a large density of species unknown to humanity. But the general division between snakes/lizards and dinosaurs/birds/turtles/crocs is there. I found it extremely difficult to decide if kavu and dragons/drakes are closer to lizards or dinosaurs. One main difference on earth is lizard limbs go to the side of main body, dinosaur limbs are under it. But the dragon art is highly inconsistent across. Same with kavu where some have lizard limbs, some have dinosaur limbs. I classified kavu as lizards, but most likely kavu is just a lazy term that groups several type of reptile-like creatures spanning multiple orders. Same with lhurgoyfs, because the first observed specimen had clearly side-sticking out limbs [Ericsson et al]. Slivers and hydras were also a challenge. I classified them as reptiles but changes they had to go through are severe so in the end I am not sure if they are reptiles at all or members of group unknown on Earth that convergently evolved features similar to reptiles. Worth noting that hydras have also dinosaur and lizard sub types, so maybe multiverse scholars went with a simplistic “many heads = hydra” approach which, judging by their incompetence elsewhere, is more than likely.

All birds are in the same group. Not even eagles are separated. This means even Discovery Channel has a higher level of attention to detail in their approach. Same with dinosaurs. Who cares that Ceratops, Brontodons and Colossal Dreadmaw are very different groups of animals? Not multiverse scholars, I can give you that. Hell with it – they even dumped pterosaurs in the mix, because clearly their peers are not taking peer review seriously and let such sloppiness pass.

An ecologist in me also questions selective bias of the multiverse zoologists. 348 dragons. That is a lot of apex predators. Do all those serpents live of an Ancient Carp? The food chains of multiverse seem a bit tilted towards the meateaters. And it doesn’t get much better with mammals.

Here we do much better. Yes, only 2 marsupials, yes, no platypus – c’mon that is a creature type that asks to be made. But we do have elephants, bunch of non-human primates, 4 types of rodents. On that – I know that brushwagg is described as a hedgehog-like creature but it is also described as a herbivore. And hedgehogs surely are not. Don’t trust the pre-school propaganda, they don’t carry apples on their backs but eat worms and insects. Which is possibly why multiverse biologists are confused as they have problem with distinguishing insects and worms. If brushwagg eats plants, almost certainly it is a close relative of a porcupine not hedgehog, which makes it a rodent.

The mammalian classification covers large chunk of what we know on Earth. There are even some pangolins, bats and moles. But apart from brushwagg, nothing out of this world, which is partially strange, you would expect that in such a multitude of worlds and with a good half a dozen key groups of reptiles some novel classes on mammals would have evolved. But it is not represented in the diversity of multiverse life. Why would that be so? Perhaps because any a-typical mammal is chucked onto one large pile of “Beast” type. 476. Of. Them. How are we going to learn more about the indriks when the pseudoscientific charlatans of multiverse biology just call is a beast and are happy and content with that achievement?

For the last we have two major groups of animals. Artiodactyla were previously known as the even toed ungulates. No? Still doesn’t ring a bell? Let’s take a look.

Here be dragon fodder. All the goats, deer, antelopes, aurochs. And for some reason whales and by connotation leviathans, since they are close relatives of hippos. Now obviously some leviathans don’t look like whales at all, being crabs and all. Yet another proof that the scientific method of multiverse naturalists is “it big it leviathan” despite all the signs pointing towards the contrary. But in this part we have the only good example of multiverse taxonomists being similar to Earth taxonomists: humourless pedantic soul-sucking monsters. When they split Ox and Aurochs, where Aurochs clearly means “ancient ox”, I mean ox is literally in the name. Sure multiverse scientists, all insects are basically the same but be my guest – split ancient ox and contemporary ox into two categories just to see the world burn. I would like to specify that Jon Finkel was not included in the goat count, although he probably should have been.

So with carnivore food out of the way, we can look at the last phylogenetic tree I made. The Carnivora. You can only guess what that means.

The carnivores are divided into two tribes. Cat-like and dog-like. And you can quickly see which group of scientists showed more dedication and work ethic. Cat scientists, having to serve their pet overlords 16h per day, could only come up with 3 mongooses and 6 hyenas and a truckloads of felids clustered into one group of “cats”. Sure thing. Tiger is exactly the same as a sabertooth lion and a house cat. Put Pouncing Cheetah and Pridemalkin next to each other and just see what happens.

On the flip side of this argument we have dog-loving wise and certainly attractive scientists of the multiverse. Aided by their faithful companions they used their time to divide the dog-like creatures scrupulously. 4 types of canids. 6 types of mustelids. On top of that a walrus and some bears. Good effort dog scientists of the multiverse. You did a decent job. But not perfect. How does tanuki cluster with the dogs when it clearly is related to foxes? Why separating wolves from dogs, when it is practically the same species? Don’t you think separating sables and weasels is a tad too much? Many questions, few answers. Still, compared to the sloppiness of the cat boffins – bravo!

I hope that my treatise convinced you of one thing. Biologists of the multiverse are incompetent nincompoops. Lack of rigor, sloppy work, inconsistency. What better proof do you need that the creature type of multiverse scholars is “human”?

Unlike the thriving, albeit badly systematised, fauna of the multiverse, our animals are going through some rough times. Consider supporting conservations charities, so that children of the future don’t have to learn about rhinos from Crashing Footfalls. That card truly sucks.

*I hope that at some stage you realised this is an April Fools joke but if you didn’t:

1. it is
2. what are you doing still reading this if you didn’t know it is a joke?
3. Carl Woese and his work on modern phylogenetics are actually cool. You can read more about it here