"John M. Baker" wrote:
>
> Jimmy Dunn cannot be contested. If a second Jimmy enters play,
> the first is burned.
>
> Okay, so let's say I'm playing my Jimmy-Dunn-and-Necromancy
> deck. I've got Jimmy in play.
>
> My opponent pulls out Jimmy, and mine burns. On his next turn,
> his Jimmy gets Vicissitude.
>
> I then Possess my Jimmy back into play, burning his Jimmy. My
> opponent smiles and plays Reform Body, only sending his Jimmy
> to torpor, instead.
Interesting situation.
So far, it looks legal from card text.
> Now, are there two Jimmy Dunns in play?
Yes. Meaning that they would contest each other.
But Jimmy cannot be contested (by card text), so the
"first" Jimmy is burned and the "second" Jimmy comes
into play.
In this case, the Reformed Jimmy is still the "first"
Jimmy, since he was never actually burned. So he is
burned (after his brief trip to torpor).
> If his Jimmy didn't Reform, could my Possessor then do some
> Soul Stealing on the burned Jimmy?
No. Your possesor didn't burn Jimmy. If anything, your
Jimmy burned Jimmy (and Jimmy cannot play Soul Stealing
in this case, since he is not the acting vampire - not
to mention his lack of necromancy).
I'll put this on the list for RT review, however, since
the situation is far from clear.
--
LSJ (vte...@wizards.com) V:TES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.wizards.com/VTES/rules.asp