Fungus Among Us - Morophon, the Boundless (EDH)
This deck is inspired by Last Stand which I've always wanted to play. It's a fun...
Why is Kindred a Card Type and Not a Supertype?
General forum
Posted on Sept. 29, 2025, 9:18 p.m. by DemonDragonJ
I saw this post on Mark Rosewater's Tumblr account, so I wished to ask why kindred is a card type, akin to "creature" or "land," and not a supertype, as are "legendary" and "snow;" I am certain that this subject has been discussed, before, but I still wished to ask, about it, as every kindred card is also another type, so I am wondering why kindred is not a supertype.
What does everyone else say, about this? Why is kindred a card type and not a supertype? I am very interested to receive your responses, on this subject.
plakjekaas says... #3
To clarify a bit: if Kindred was a supertype, Bitterblossom's typeline would just read:
Kindred Enchantment
The Fairie type would not be there, because Faerie is not an enchantment type. As we all know, it's a creature subtype, but Bitterblossom is not a creature, so it can't have that. For an enchantment to have a creature type, it must have creature as a card type.
Or... a different card type that can have creature subtypes. Kindred is the card type that enables noncreature spells to count as a creature for kindred effects by giving them a creature type anyway (like Bitterblossom counting as a faerie for Spellstutter Sprite without being a Faerie creature itself, or Coax from the Blind Eternities being able to find All is Dust)
legendofa says... #2
To make the rules work, mostly. Types can have subtypes, supertypes can't.
Kindred has a list of subtypes, which overlaps completely with the list of subtypes associated with the Creature type (Advisor to Zubera). If Kindred was a supertype, like Legendary or Snow, it wouldn't be able to have the associated subtypes without rewriting a big chunk of supertype/type/subtypes rules.
September 29, 2025 9:47 p.m.