Subject says it all.

I'm kind of concerned that Conspiracies seem to be essentially indestructible. They aren't Support cards, nor are they Events, or Characters. Am I correct in thinking that the only way to get rid of 'em is to put 5, 6, or 10 (in various cases) success tokens on them?

My main concern is how it will affect the metagame with the advent of the cards we've seen in Lost Rites . If struggles simply don't exist at some of those Conspiracy cards by default, that is a HUGE game changer…

yup, 95% sure they can't be destroyed (just as some 'conspiracies' in real life don't seem to die), and by default negotium perambulans just made it into my favourite deck, especially now that Miskatonic are gonna be more popular than ever………

So far there's no way to destroy them but I guess it's only a matter of time.

Still, there are already plenty of ways to deal with Conspiracy cards: replacing/adding/removing struggles, denying/forcing commitment of characters (or uncommitting them), adding/removing success tokens, changing the rules of struggle resolution, etc.

Foiled!
Type: Support Faction: Neutral
Cost: 0
Attachment
Attach to a story card.
Treat attached story as if its text box were blank.
Illustrator: Raymond Gaustadnes
Set: TPtY

Struggles stay but still might help.

I wonder about:

Heart of the Labyrinth Story:
Each player names a card type. The player to his left must then choose a card of that type he controls and return it to hand.

Do you control a conspiracy card? (other than that this story effect seems not to do much)

And im also worried by new MU conspiracy with no T or C struggles… i think struggles are what makes this game interesting, with cards like those it seems like you will play with boring card effects to hurt characters… I really think effects like substract 3-4 C or T icons while counting or sth would be better - still protects MU but u can overcome them with enough icons.

To top it off, they are considered to be story cards after they enter play (per the Core rule book). If you play a full story deck like I typically do (all story cards from Core, SoA, and 2012 combined), then The Innsmouth Threat being on the board is game over for a rush desk going up against Negotium. Stuff like Misinformation or Changing the Names could help I suppose, but it's wholly annoying.

i too am 'concerned' about cards that you absolutley have to guard against in your decks, NOT COMPLAINING!! there's very few but combing the archives has definately sky-rocketed to public enemy number 1 for me. if you don't have an answer then miskatonic simply has to fill its deck with this, red gloved man and ol crazy eyes and it would APPEAR to be a very short game.

and yes, yes, of course there are some simple fixes when you're willing to use certain factions (cthulhu / hastur) or certain cards (negotium / setting sun) but this is exactly my point. what if i don't want to?? i'm all for making miskatonic more powerful, but in ways that don't make (cthulhu) an even more logical choice to defend against it.

it's also 'concerning' that this card pretty much well spells the end of a mono-yog deck, just when it was getting viable. with no way of changing or adding struggle types, uncomitting characters or handing out multi - destructions, my favourite faction has seriously been short changed and i'll be waiting for FFG to rectify this in further asylum packs (expecting is probably a better word if sanity plays a part). NOTE: dreams in limbo may stall for a round but its certainly not an answer.

i've made the mistake of pre-judging though before so i'll wait patiently for the asylum packs that hopefully give it more sense in the broader picture, and till then just knuckle down and work out a way to nuetralise it and sigh at how my deck is shifting towards no longer being my own but the deck that FFG dictates it has to be.

confused but resolute!! (ia! ia! yog-sothoth)

from FAQ: Out of play is the Draw Deck, Hand, Domains (and resources), and Discard Pile.

with no mention of the conspiracy cards. so can dragged to the deep return combing the archives to the bottom of its players deck?? i'm still searching for where it might say that conspiracies are unique. i'm thinking i may have seen somewhere that the same story can be played by both players, but only 1 PER player?? (if this is true i'm gonna shoot myself for helping grrrrr - cthulhu).

EDIT: just consulted rule book where it states:

2) *****they enter the game as 'new' story cards, in addition to the three that are currently IN PLAY.

7) if a conspiracy card leaves play for any reason other than being won, it is placed in it's owners discard pile. if a conspiracy card is discarded, all success tokens on that card are lost.

so, i suppose, conspiracies CAN be removed without winning, and dragged to the deep might be the card to do it, banished to the bottom of the deck!! (god i hate cthulhu).

.Zephyr. said:

With all the hullabaloo about Negotium Perambulens in Tenebris, I am surprised Foiled! has not been noted earlier here. Nice catch, Zephyr.

It's currently the most effective/efficient answer and a deck running weenie rush should not leave home without it if they expect to battle that conspiracy card, since according to the rulebook conspiracy cards are treated like story cards while they are in play.

As for the lack of Terror or Combat icons on the previewed Nerd Conspiracy, I am not too worried. It may prove to be detrimental but apparently years ago the idea of reorganizing and removing certain icons at stories has been mulled over. The idea at the time was binned, but apparently it is being brought to the fore again.

I have faith in Damon's abilities as a designer for this game and beleive it has improved overall since he has come aboard. I think the idea of such struggle icon reorganization deserves a fair shake.

yup, any deck running NPIT certainly needs support destructions, and i think we may see snow graves make a stunning comeback.

*****DELETED FOR FURTHER PLAYTESTING*****

(but a hint would be):

NPIT
Y’Golonac
Voice of the jungle

and of course S. destructions