MTG also had a Lord of the Rings set just recently-it doesn't mean they are the same setting. Likewise, wotc published official 'Rick and Morty' for D&D.
Maybe WotC will consolidate their two big fantasy multiverses in the future. I wouldn't put it past them, but I think it would ultimately be a big mistake, as while the two IPs superficially share a lot of similarities, they are very different on a fundamental, world building scale. D&D (the ruleset) is just a medium. Same with mtg. You can potentially explore LotR or Elder Scrolls or Star Wars or Forgotten Realms or Rick and Morty or whatever in this medium, but they are still different settings.
Good points all around. I'd say two things in response.
1. While Wizards of the Coast (who make both games) have had an IP cross-over kick in recent years, the ties between MtG and DnD are older than this relatively new trend. They've shared staff, including designers; they share lore DNA in their common love for Tolkien; the third set printed for MtG (back in 1994!) was based on a DnD campaign played by MtG designers. (They straight up made their player characters into magic cards).
2. I agree that the rulesets could be used to describe any setting. However, I'd argue that the "vanilla" versions of MtG and DnD have settings that are at the very least compatible. It's goblins and dragons and magic, Oh my! Sure, those are fantasy tropes today, but I think DnD and MtG helped normalize their settings as "default fantasy" by being old and popular (and stealing a good amount from Tolkien... with some pushback from his estate ^^).
In the end, do I expect Vedalken in BG3? No, I do not. However, I'm confident the MtG set themed around Baldur's Gate 3 went through several rounds of vetting to make sure the cards ligned up with the video game. Based on that, I'm optimistic about Dragonborn, Lizardfolk, Tabaxi, Aarakokra and Githzerai as well as the artificer and monk classes. The set also has a bunch of named characters but I would recommend against looking into that if spoilers are an issue.
Edit :
And some of those creature types on your list like Azra were simply reprints for the Commander Decks, so they don't count (In CL sets Commander Decks are concidered apart of the main set, just not draftable, and don't get a seperate expansion symbol).
I couldn't tell from the Gatherer web page whether the cards were from commander decks, as the whole thing is called Commander Legends : Battle for Baldur's Gate. That does explain why so many reprints, though. And it makes Aarakokra less likely in BG3, because the Bird Wizard I found (Aven Mindcensor) is just a reprint.
I'll also add that there was that free adventure with AFR that had the Ravnican villian in the Forgotten Realms. Despite coming from Magic the Gathering, the Campaign Books GMGtR, MOoT, and S:CoC are all written as if they occur in the main cosmology, Theros for example is mention as being in the Material Plane and Strixhaven has Tieflings, Halflings, Slaads, and Dragonborn for example.
Huh, knews to me. Good info, thanks!
