Abbess Allegria Di Biase

Uh, shouldn't she cost 6 or something? What a killer card.

With Loyal, Conspiracy requirement and Pay 1 for the ability she seems about right to me. I agree though that she is 'Most Blessed'!

Hm. 3 loyal isn't that hard to pull off, but I guess it does make her significantly more expensive than a straight 3-cost (unless you're playing monofaction). That action, though! She's like a supersnake.

A very interresting character, I agree.
But she has no subtype that could let you reduce her costs (exceptThe Rope and Anchor Tavern (KD), but I doubt that this would make sense at all...)
Agency has most cool characters with cost 3 (and a lot are unique ones - like Abbess Allegria Di Biase as well) so it's a hard choice to decide which one you want to play first...

I'm glad to see that Agency is getting some good backup

She's quite good, but I think cost 6 is an exaggeration. 4 perhaps. Both Unique and Loyal are drawbacks, and some of her good stuff only works with a Conspiracy in play. Even if you get one in play, it may not stay there forever.

The change-an-icon part is really nice, but you have to drain a domain for each one and those are often tight, that's one less Shotgun for example.

Mainly I'm just happy to see Agency get some interesting stuff, usually when I try to build an Agency deck it seems so boring.

Good character, but it's costed appropriately in my opinion. Her ability is going to be difficult to use. It's really hard playing Agency and holding back even more domains. So many of their key cards already need to do this.

Looks so-so to me, she needs to deal with T and C struggles. Having 4A is usually overkill, and changing it to something else is costly, unlike Feathered Serpent (MoE) that gets loads of cheap icons. Doesn't do anything except icons, and loyal is really huge.
Possible I icon can be nice, but pay 1 is huge with current card pool, where cost 1 effects tend to be really strong.
Without loyal she might be ok character.
With loyal she's closer to a bookmark unless you have mono Agency idea and some great effect to fire off won A struggles.
Compare it to Marshall Greene (THBtS) - not even close, and greene has no loyal and government reduction potential.

Even with conspiracy in play willpower is inferior to having a single T icon, and "cannot be wounded by card effects" is much inferior to invulnerability. Often Toughness +1 would be better.

Cost 6 was deliberate hyperbole, but I still think she looks like a lot of fun. (And Marshall has always been an exceptional badass, IMNSHO.)

Yeah it seems to me she'd only really be useful in a Special Agent Clarkston (AoA) type cost reducing deck, and then only because you're only paying 2 and agency is lacking arcane. Her inability to go insane is also a bit of a drawback, seeing as in most cases you'd probably want to keep your combat and investigation type characters at the ready.

I agree completely with Zephyr, and would add that even in mono-agency decks Nathaniel Elton, Kirby O'Donnell, and obviously Marshall Greene (and probably Steve Clarney, too) are all better choices.

Well, you actually ARE allowed to run her in addition to those guys if you want. Yes, Loyal 3 makes her mostly good for mono decks but there's nothing wrong with that. In those decks she's a fairly cool character and maybe you run some Eldritch Nexus to help pay for her ability. Not everything has to be Tier 1 Worlds.

Well she isn't Government so Clarkston won't reduce her cost.

Lol good point

Not so good if you take into considerations all the restrictions.

Like her in my Hunter deck. Good flavorful addition. Wish I had more copies of Eldritch Nexus for her though.

In a mono-Agency deck, you're probably hurting for arcane icons, so I don't think you even want to be changing her icons that much. And in a deck with Dynamite and Death Comes For All and Flush Them Out, she's pretty mighty because she shrugs off her own Dynamite.

What generally happens with an ability like that is that your opponent knows you COULD spend your empty domain to gain Terror or Combat and this messes with their commitment plan.  Often then you end up not actually having to use the ability for one of these (because they don't want to have to commit extra characters to guard against both possibilities), and then you have the option to use it for Investigation instead, or else just keep the domain open to play (or threaten to play) a 1-cost event or some other ability you have in play.

Once Death Comes For All is won, how does it affect the Abbess?  She's immune to card effects that wound as long as there is a conspiracy in play, but is a conspiracy still in play once it is won?  It seems like the Abbess should be immune to the mass-wounding from Death Comes For All since both cards are from the same set, but I still have a sliver of doubt.

Nope. It says pretty clearly: "After this conspiracy card is won each player must wound each character he controls not committed to this conspiracy." So it is no longer a conspiracy card in play when its effect goes off. 

 

The implicit text, of course, is: "each character he controls not committed to this conspiracy [when it is won]," since after it is won, there's no conspiracy in play to be committed to!

I think I am with Cathoris on this. Also from the rules:: [number points inserted]

Immediately after a player has won a story card that player:

1) takes the story card,

2) chooses whether or not to execute its effect, and then

3) places it prominently in his game area, faceup, to indicate that he has won the story.

 

Without strong contrary evidence, I would interpret step 1 as removing the story card from play. That would mean the story card is neither in play nor yet in your won pile when if effect occurs.