Should I be able to play a Focusing Conduit-Blade from hand when one in okay is destroyed? It seems like I should, but I couldn't yesterday (the card in hand was grayed out). Is this a bug or is it because it's a limited card and I am misunderstanding the order of when it is considered destroyed (or possibly something else I'm missing)?
The card is still in play while the destruction is occurring and it's a limited card so you can't play another copy of Focusing Conduit Blade.
It intuitively seems like you should be able to play a FC Blade after waxing one - to me, it seems like that's how the card *wants* to work and when I couldn't do that I admit to sighing a mildly exasperated "Really?!"
Allowing that to happen, though, apparently creates a lot of other loophole nightmares so if the design team wants to avoid those, then I completely get that and will still be able to enjoy KNYFE doing KNYFE combo things - I just won't be able to.... (ahem) overdo it as much.
As I undedrstand it, in Sentinels the technical definition of Destroyed is "When a card is removed from play." So the card can't be still be in play when the ability that triggers from its destruction is in effect.
…
As far as I know. I'm probably wrong. But I really like chaining blades so I want it to work! 
If a card has an effect on its destruction, it stays in play until its effect finishes, then it leaves play.
Same thing happens with Explosives Wagon, so I can't expect it to function any differently here.
The obvious kneejerk solution would be to make Focused Conduit Blade unlimited, but then KNYFE would be borderline silly with multiple FCB's out "Ya dinnae mind if I lance ya for 5 damage a turn, doncha laddies?"
Bottom line, I guess, is that while it'd certainly be nice if there were more than 4 cards in KNYFE's deck you could chain with Focusing Conduit's clause (2x Servos and 2x other thing), it's still nicer than there being 0 cards.
Could the card (actually, it would need to be all of her equipment cards) be rewritten(for the video game) to function like one of the Ennead's cards? Have the text be something like:
Focusing Conduit Blade
(equipment, limited)
You may immediately play this card if a Focusing Conduit Blade enters your trash.
Increase energy damage dealt by KNYFE by 1
power: KNYFE deals a target 3 energy damage. Destroy this card.
Granted, this does let you play an FCB (or shield, or glove) if someone like Ermine makes you discard another one, but you can't search for them (like Ra can his staff), so I'm ok with that.
Maybe I’m missing something but what problems would it create if it were ruled that you may have multiple copies of each limited card in play as long as all but 1 copy of that card is in the process of executing their on destruction effects?
I was actually about to post Dandolo's proposed resolution, as it seems like it would resolve this interaction in the least destructive manner. I think if this idea were to be considered, there would need to be a clear distinction between "active" card text and "on destruction" card text.
You could just say “when this card is destroyed, change its name to…then you may play…”
I think instead of changing card text, it would be better to try and fashion the game mechanics to accomodate this situation. That way we're not retroactively fixing already printed cards like we did with Cloaking Device (among others).
If a card has text that activates while it is being destroyed, it does not count as being Limited while that text is in effect. However, if this would cause any effects to double-dip (+2 energy from the conduit blades, etc.) only one of them may apply. Ideally, the one that isn’t being destroyed, although it doesn’t really matter.
That isn’t to say that they lose their text entirely – it would still retain its on-destruction effects, after all – but it would basically be like equipping multiple pieces of armor in Pathfinder; if they provide the same type of benefit, the one that is stronger wins.
This brings to mind an oddity with Captain Cosmic. If Destructive Response triggers on Cosmic Crest's destruction in the video game, that Cosmic Crest is still available as a target for the damage from Destructive Response -- but its effect of making constructs immune to energy damage doesn't apply.
So, somehow, Cosmic Crest is still in play as a target with 4 HP, but the text on the card is not?
That seems like an unintended effect. If the card is still in play, the text is still in play.
Not quite. If a card has a destruction effect all of its text stays in play. If the card stays in play because of another destruction effect, it’s text does not stay in play.
That’s dumb. Why is it different? It shouldn’t be different just because one has the trigger on the card as another is triggered by another card.
Also, Mountainous Carapace still protects Akash’Bhuta while it’s being destroyed. I know it’s not the same thing, but still.
I think the Crest should continuing functioning during its destruction.
Moutainous Carapce has an "On Destruction" effect so the entire text stays in play. I first noticed, and confirmed, this interaction when Stealth Bot was destroyed with Volatile Parts in play which destroyed Sonic Mine. Stealth Bot is still in play, because it is waiting for the resolution of Volatile Parts, but it can't redirect all the Sonic Mine damage and save the heroes, because its text is not in play.
Yes, it should, and it has to be.
When a card is destroyed, its text is no longer in effect. That is the general rule.
Exception: when it cares about its own destruction; otherwise, any text on cards that reads "when this card is destroyed" would never take effect due to the general rule.
Hey look at that MigrantP, it's almost as if no one knows the "cards with on destruction text retain their text while being destroyed." rule.
That might be a thing to add to the Fireside chats.
That’s not really a thing that came from the video game, though. It wasn’t new or a change. I mean, they could include it, but it’s not really appropriate… :-/
I agree with this, it explains my idea a bit more thoroughly. Ultimately, it's up to the powers-that-be, though 
*Looks at title of fireside chats thread*
Clarifications... hmm.
I think what Rabit is saying is that wasn't a discussion that needed to be clarified between Christopher and Handelabra, as it seems to have always worked as intended on the video game (correct me if I'm wrong). Along those lines, I would see why adding it to the Fireside Chat thread would be "inappropriate," per se. Not that there isn't a place for it in a consolidated FAQ.
Like this?
"When Apostate's Tome of the Unknowable and Ammo Drop are both in play, Ammo Drop is still able to trigger the Tome's "play a card" effect when the Tome is destroyed. This is due to cards being in play during their own destruction."
In general, the Fireside Chats thread is simply a cleaned up version of the questions & answers we have with Christopher. it is not an FAQ or a place to add things other than that. I think it would be great for an FAQ to be maintained by the community again.
Wait, doesn’t that ruling on Tome and Ammo Drop contradict the general rule that unless a card has on destruction text it’s game text leaves play before effects on other cards that trigger on that card’s destruction trigger?
It does have on-destruction card text. Here is the card text for reference:
Whenever a Player draws a Hero card, play the top card of the Villain deck.Since the Tome still has to search for Condemnation, its full card text is still active.
When this card is destroyed, search the Villain trash for the card "Condemnation" and put it into play.
That’s what I get for not double checking the card before posting… that makes perfect sence then.
I’m not saying it’s dumb that cards with text keep it while being destroyed, I’m saying it’s dumb that others DON’T.