Your intuition is almost right, but not quite. Yes, when the electric field of a charge is described in a moving frame, magnetic fields appear. But that does not make the magnetic field less fundamental.
Why a charged object produces an electric field? Well because it has electrons and protons that by themselves have also an elementary electric charge (no more questions asked here). This elementary charge is a fundamental quantity.
Where does a magnet get its magnetic field from? Partially from moving charges, but some of its magnetism also comes from stationary electrons and protons (and even neutrons) as well. These subatomic particles have an intrinsic magnetic moment (basically they behave as a femto-sized magnet). This elementary magnetic moment does not come from anything more fundamental as far as we know. It is analogous to the elementary charge.
You can be in the rest frame of a neutron (that has no net charge) and interact with the magnetic field of its magnetic moment. In a moving frame, electric fields would appear. In this case electric fields are the relative effect, not the magnetic field.
You also have to consider electromagnetic waves, where you can have an oscillating electric and an oscillating magnetic field in vacuum. Which is more fundamental? None, you cannot move to a frame where one or the other disappears as EM waves travel at the speed of light.
What about magnetic monopoles? If the monopoles exist, we will not be able to understand them as anything more fundamental than the elementary charge, or the magnetic moment of the electron. If there are elementary particles with magnetic monopoles, then this would be just another elementary property. Just because it is related to magnetic field does not make it more unusual than the electric charge.
Summary: magnetic fields are not more real than the electric fields. And a magnetic monopole would be just be as fundamental as an elementary electric charge.