Thoughts on the Monsters of Magic The Gathering

In spite of how crappy the game has become in so many aspect over time, there is no denying there are aspects of Magic: The Gathering which remain quite fascinating, in spite of how much recent set and settings/planes show that the game is way past its prime when it come to interesting ideas. Yet hidden in the rehashes and lack of ambition there are still monsters which are interesting. Many of these creatures exist either on a scant few cards or as a larger established creature that still has untapped potential. Now some of these I will skip, especially many of the Iconic/Characteristic creatures (such as Angel, Demons, Goblins or Elves) since I don't have anything interesting to say about them or they are established fantasy staples. Other are stranger, more nebulous and despite being established in some capacity across the lore of the multiverse they just haven't gotten their chance to shine.

Archons

Archon of Falling Stars by Victor Adame Minguez

The word Archon is one which I find mainstream D&D has always mistreated. The word Archon means 'ruler' in Ancient Greek and this has powerful connotations yet mainstream D&D has treated them as a fairly bland and interchangeable flavor of Celestials (lets face it, D&D Celestials fucking sucks!). In Magic, however, Archons are creatures of White mana which seem to embody the more Lawful aspect of the color. They are creatures of celestial might, wrath and most importantly of order. Archons in my opinion offer an interesting design space for a glowing, celestial being that is most definitely not one of our modern definitions of good, but rather closer to Old Testament or Pagan sense of judgment and wrath. Physically, Archons appear as luminous beings on a (usually) flying mount and they lack faces, either because it is obscured by their hood or helmet or flat out because it lacks one period.

So far, Archons have appeared a few times in Dungeons & Dragon 5th edition which can give us some limited insight into how they would function and behave as a monster beyond the scope of a playing card. Archons are (usually) resistant or flat out immune to radiant and mental effects as well as non-magical weapons. They are either fused or bonded with their flying mount and they all have some sort of compelling/control spell or a geas. Their thematic as axiomatic beings of celestial/cosmic law with power over mortals is thus well covered by their mechanics which I think make them solid monster and their varied choice of weapons (spear, swords or else) as well as suitably impressive mounts (winged lions, bulls or anything else such as a giant bird) make them quite awe inspiring. Perhaps the prevalance of flying beasts in a setting hint that, in ancient time, these were created and raised to serve as mounts to the ancient Archons? In addition, one interesting and often overlooked aspect of Archons is they are the White counterpart to the Specter type, at least visually.

• Archons as rulers of ancient humans and establishing civilization, bringing order from chaos, make for an interesting setting role especially since this can be both positive and negative depending on many factors. While an Archon brings about order, they might also be seen as little more than glorified tyrants.
• In addition to this, Archon make for a suitably varied and interesting replacement for the much more boring and specific Modrons and Inevitables, which are these days very much associated with the major mainstream D&D settings. Not only that, but Archons embody a different type of cosmic law, which is to say order, rulership or even tyranny as opposed to cold mechanical logic.

Baloths

Leatherback Baloth by Dave Kendall

I love Baloth, even if they admittedly aren't very interesting. Now technically 'Baloth' is not a distinct creature type as cards named Baloths are classified under the Beast creature type. Visually, a Baloth is a big pseudo reptilian monster, usually covered in spikes, horns and/or armored plates, however Baloth from Zendikar have hooves and resemble more creatures such as rhinoceros. It is possible that they aren't purely reptilian as infant Baloths are called 'pups' but this could also mean nothing. Baloths are huge, dumb and destructive monsters with a particularly huge appetite. In fact, its the flavor text of Enormous Baloth, in the first MTG starter set I bought, that immediately jumped to me:

"Its diet consists of fruits, plants, small woodland animals, large woodland animals, woodlands, fruit groves, fruit farmers, and small cities."

Baloth, to put it bluntly are very much mini-kaijus and sometimes you don't really need more in a monster. Their key, nay, only motivation is hunger. Baloths are very, very hungry creatures and this all consuming hunger make them omnivorous. This could open up some interesting adventures, as it is likely that magic items eaten by these monsters are simply swallowed whole and left to fester inside the monster's gut. Baloth, in my opinion, are a good monster that walks a fine line between plausible and magical, such as the owlbear. Interestingly, they appear to be something that can be tamed by druids. Interesting tidbit, there!

• Baloth make excellent random encounter monsters. However, it is very likely that astute characters might be able to guess they are in the territory of one as basically everything has been eaten, with truly massive specimen eating even entire woodlands.
• Baloth are nearly exclusively Green creatures and spellcasters of Green mana are usually classified as Druids. As pointed out above, it is very likely that Druids can tame lesser baloth and use them as guard animals, mount or even some sort of terror weapon against their enemies. A druid controlling a rampaging horde of Baloths could easily destroy an entire region in days. Baloth can also be made into undead.
• What use could players have for a dead Baloth? Quite, a few things, actually. Baloth are massive, presumably the smallest adult Baloths would be Large-sized in modern D&D. Their meat and hide may have good enough value; non-magical use might simply be to make super tough leather and scale armor while those used as reagent for magic potions could likely be used to make potions which temporary boost strength or size.

Specters

Abyssal Specter by 'Daarken'

Let's face it, these guys are pretty much a riff on the Nazgûl of the Tolkien legendarium. Mind you there is nothing wrong with that, as the Ringwraiths are iconic monsters of fantasy yet we don't really see much creatures which carry the legacy of terror these creatures once inspired. Physically they are, as pointed above, a dark mirror to the Archons or rather from a real life chronology the Archons are the light mirror to the Specters. Unlike Archons, however, Specters are definitely of human origin rather than some being born of mana and as such as Undead. Beyond that we know very little as only a few Specters have 'flavor text' which speak of their nature and isn't entirely plane-specific.

Specters as depicted in Magic, in my opinion, make for a much better Wraith than those usually depicted in D&D. Their flying mount are way more impressive than just being some flying blob of darkness. Assuming they share mechanical similarities to the Archons when it come to their mount bond, it open up some interesting ideas. Finally, Specters are infamous for their 'deal damage, discard a card' effect which clearly represent them draining mental abilities from the target which is likely carried by any weapon they use as well as the claws or beak of their mount. In a high power game where players have access to flight, Specters make for a great and dangerous airborne encounter. Given the association of Discard mechanics with madness or mental attacks, the Specters abilities to cause discard and Undead nature it might be possible that Specters are the undead form of powerful beings driven to madness. This, at the very least, is part of their lore Ravnica but, again, hard to say beyond that plane. Perhaps, then, their 'mount' is a part of their psyche which is dissociated with them. The two serve the same goals but have different personalities which could cause Specters to have rein in their overly eager or even sluggish mounts. One mind, but two personalities and attention spans, perhaps? Finally unlike Shades, very few Specters have any evasion abilities which make me believe they are at least primarily corporeal despite their name.

• Specters can work both as major antagonist in their own right or as minions. However, as a creature type in Magic they are somewhat lacking in Legendary Creatures; there is not a single (as of this post) Legendary Specter. This is a bit of a disappointing oversight or, perhaps, it may hint that these creatures are invariably minions, albeit powerful ones. This certainly ties back into their Ringwraith inspiration, even if I'd argue the Ringwraiths would certainly fit the bill as Legendary Creatures.
• Fighting a Specter is never going to be fun, as their iconic discard ability very clearly represent some form of mental attack. This make Specters a strong contender, among MTG's creatures, as being quite strongly tied to the iconic level drain (or their counterpart in later editions). At the very least, all Specter should have some mean of draining mental stats and/or the ability to disrupt a spellcaster's abilities, possibly making them empty their spell slot!