Hi, its me BlackAion, back from self-exile in part due to college and in part due to this site-more specifically this sub-forum-robbing me of any joy I get from the official stories. But that's not what I'm here to discuss.

What I am here to discuss is the definition of "Sensitives" in the MTG verse. I remember vaguely that Urza or Johan or someother planeswalker in the books mentioned something about sensitives. From what I gathered "Sensitives" describes any person with inherent magical abilities but may not be a mage themselves. Is this the definition of a "Sensitive"? If yes, Do Sensitives make up a relatively bigger population compared to actual mages? It is hard to say because some creatures are given abilities soley based on mechanics and not on anything to do with lore. In relation to last, Can any living creature be a sensitive? I would assume so as magical abilities cannot be learned, and strike me as something more instinctual. What are your opinions.

I'd guess it is on par with how some people in the Star Wars universe are "force sensitive" and, without training, never really become Jedi or Sith, or whatever else uses the force as a conduit for power. They're just people who have/had the potential, but never acted on it.

A magic sensitive individual may have varying degrees of access to the power they can feel. It may manifest as just a feeling when magic users are near to strange outbursts of energy in times of stress.

It's generally indicative of Magic's take on, well, magic. It went from a generic fantasy approach to a more potentially meritocratic ontology.

Meritocratic Ontology?

I don't think that is the case. There was a old story about a Jund warrior Dragonsoul Knight where after journeying across all of New Alara he gained the ability to turn into dragon, though he wasn't actually a mage.

Yeah I don't know what that is, but it's probably a brain fart.