Modern Times - Speculating on Unbannings

Hello everyone! On today’s edition of Modern Times we're focusing on the idea of expectations. In particular, the expectations of future banned list decisions in Modern and, of course, their potential financial ramifications.

The last banned list update in Modern was in October of 2022 when Yorion, Sky Nomad was finally removed from the format’s meta. Prior to that, was banned in March of 2022. Even before Lurrus, in February of 2021, we had a swathe of bannings including: Field of the Dead, Mystic Sanctuary, Simian Spirit Guide, Tibalt's Trickery, and Uro, Titan of Nature's Wrath.

On the flipside, unbannings have been fewer and much farther between. You would have to go all the way back to July of 2019 to find an unbanning decision (Stoneforge Mystic ). And it’s these unbanning decisions that are the most interesting to consider and where there’s a lot of low-risk, high-reward potential. But in order to consider what banned list speculations are worthwhile, we must think about how players and investors think about the format and the expectations they form with regards to future (un)bannings.

 

A Formula for Speculating on Unbannings

So what is the state of Modern? What cards do players think may be banned or unbanned in the near future? These expectations (even if nothing changes in terms of format legality) can have dramatic impacts on the market movements of certain cards. How do we understand what expectations are rational when speculating about a banned list decision?

A good start for addressing this question would be to look at WOTC’s ban list philosophy (which they claim holds across all formats), which provides a set of criteria for why WOTC might ban a card in a particular format:

Cards are usually banned from play if they enable a deck or play style that heavily skews the play environment. What does that mean? If the card were legal, a competitive player either must be playing it, or must be specifically targeting it with his or her own strategies.

Some cards are banned because they have proven to simply be too powerful in their respective format. While hundreds of hours are spent rigorously playtesting sets before their release, the complexity of Magic makes it nearly impossible to accurately predict all the ways the new cards interact with older ones.

Let’s start with understanding the latter criterion and its applications to recent ban list decisions. Something being “simply too powerful” is easily observable. It's well known and a banning of a card meeting this criterion is actually somewhat predictable. Cards like , Uro, and Oko very, very easily meet this criterion. Similarly, during one of the darkest times of Modern known as Hogaak Summer, no one was particularly shocked to see Hogaak, Arisen Necropolis banned given how dominating they were in the meta.

While banned list speculation is interesting, what’s more interesting is unbanning speculations. The reason being that while there are some criteria for defining the probability a given card gets banned, there are none (at least not in writing) for defining whether a card should be unbanned. Today, I’m going to generalize some criteria for thinking about whether or not an unbanning is even remotely likely and then discuss one card (and a card complementary to it) that investors could comfortably speculate on that is already on the Modern ban list.

In terms of defining good criteria for an unbanning, the best place to start is with the existing criteria for why a card would be banned, but apply its logic to cards sitting in the format’s exile:

If a card is on the banned list, would its unbanning enable a deck that heavily skews the play environment?

If a card is on the banned list because it was once too powerful for the format, would it still be considered too powerful today?

Unlike the decisions to ban a card, in order for a card to be unbanned, in theory, it has to already be on the banned list and can have neither of the criterion above satisfied. With this in mind, I present to you two interesting cards that are more eligible than most for a potential unbanning.

 

Punishing Fire

Punishing Fire has been on the banned list since 2011, right after the first few months or so of Modern’s competitive genesis. Today its banning, or even the reason it is on the banned list, might be lost on most players as it feels like a relic of a much different era of Modern. It was banned due to its “oppressiveness” at the time, specifically due to its synergy with Grove of the Burnwillows. The Grove/Punishing Fire loop could decimate most creature-based strategies and drag out games considerably.

 

That being said, it has been over a decade since Punishing Fire was pushed to the back of the line on Modern’s banned list; perhaps it’s deserving of a second look. Let’s start by considering our second criterion by asking ourselves, would Punishing Fire be too powerful today if it were unbanned? The short answer is no. Punishing Fire at the time was the most consistent spot removal and burn outlet in the format, however, the creature base has changed dramatically since its time, plus many Modern decks possess non-creature synergies and win conditions, compared to the original days of the format where creature decks like Zoo were the top of the meta. If it were to be reintroduced into the format, it is very unlikely we would find it to be too powerful or too skewing for the format, particularly with much more efficient removal such as Unholy Heat, Fatal Push and so on. Today a Punishing Fire from Zendikar will run you around $0.35 each. Not only is picking up a playset for yourself incredibly cheap, it’s easy to buy multiple playsets for speculative sake at very little downside due to its low cost. If Punishing Fire were ever unbanned, it would likely see a spike similar to Sword of the Meek when it was unbanned. All in all, as far as financial value goes, Punishing Fire is a very low-risk, high reward investment with a realistic chance to see Modern play once more. Just remember, if you plan to speculate on Punishing Fire, you should also speculate on Grove of the Burnwillows, which has been sitting at an all-time low of around $5 for more than two years at this point.

 

Preordain

Preordain is a powerful one mana cantrip that was banned due to the perceived boost in consistency it gave blue decks, in particular Storm, during its 2010-2011 heyday. Today we have some convenient one mana blue cantrips, but none that really compare in utility to Preordain. Cards like Sleight of Hand, Consider, and Serum Visions are generally seen as strictly worse substitutes.

So using our criteria, where does Preordain stand? It’s certainly not overly powerful compared to other banned draw spells like Ponder or Treasure Cruise, but it would become arguably the best one mana blue cantrip in Modern if unbanned. On the margin, I would argue that’s not a huge problem for the format. Of the decks that would use cantrips in Modern currently, Preordain would really serve at best to replace cards like Consider in the decks they are played in. Another reason it would be unlikely to see Preordain skew the format by its presence is because most blue competitive decks play Expressive Iteration as a four-of and have no room for Preordain. So financially, where does this leave us?

Much like Punishing Fire, Preordain is incredibly affordable and has been reprinted many times. Furthermore, not only is it a cheap pick idling at around $0.36 a card, it also sees play in other formats like Pauper, Legacy, and Commander. The cross-format presence of Preordain makes its utility and potential all the more likely despite being heavily printed. If Preordain ever sees the light of day again in Modern, it’s conceivable that it could spike to a couple bucks each, so be sure to buy in bulk if you plan on speculating!

Punishing Fire	CardKingdom $0.35	TCGPlayer $0.35
Grove of the Burnwillows	CardKingdom $5.49	TCGPlayer $5.73
Preordain	CardKingdom $1.49	TCGPlayer $0.66

 

Some Final Remarks

The banned list is an integral piece of Modern that modulates and moderates the format’s health. The banned list has at times been quite costly for players and investors, but it has also proven to be quite profitable for the financially savvy as well. Speculating on a banning is like shorting a stock and carries similar risks as such. Speculating on unbannings is relatively cheap, however, and can prove to be a low-risk, high-reward opportunity for many players and investors alike.