Red Tornado:

If a team attacker you control would become stunned, instead, you may stun Red Tornado.

When Red Tornado enters a KO'd pile from play, you may return him to his owner's hand.


Safety in Numbers:

Play only if you control three or more JLI team attackers.

Ready target attacker you control. That attacker can't be stunned this attack.

Can I team-attack with 3, play Safety on Red Tornado, then choose to use Tornado's effect? He can't be stunned.. but can I choose to stun him? I'm thinking it would be similar to the Red Star/Tim Drake combo.

Exactly right. You redirect the stun to RT, and because he can't be stunned, he doesn't stun. (Just like Tim/Red Star).

Actually, it doesn't work---the wording of Red Tornado's effect makes stunning him a replacement cost; if you don't pay that cost for whatever reason, the replacement can't take place.

For Tim Drake, the replacement cost is simply choosing another team attacker, and stunning the chosen character is just the end of an "if you do" clause; the replacement there hinges on being able to choose, not being able to stun.

Uh ohhhhh. . . . .

Disappointment.

I really like Red Tornado, comics-wise. I'm not sure if he's abusable given his text.

He's pretty good for KOing to Poison Ivy.

Red Tornado:

If a team attacker you control would become stunned, instead, you may stun Red Tornado.

Tim Drake:

If a team attacker you control would become stunned, you may stun another team attacker you control instead.

So the only reason Tim Drake/Red Star works where Red Tornado/Safety in Numbers fails is because Tim is using a slightly different wording with the same intent? That bugs me.

The difference should be more clear if you look at Tim Drake's current text from the OCR:Looking at the template I quoted from the CRD, you can see that "choose another team attacker you control" is the only cost required to replace a stun.