are there any other changes to the original basic set after the latest expansions?

Not that I know of, although when the post-FiF version of the FAQ is uploaded then there might be some more additions to this list then.  I'll keep an eye out and update my original post if necessary.

During a very close and tense game against a Priest, my opponent used his Holy avenger [mwcard=MWSTX1CKC06]Guardian Angel[/mwcard] to do some nasty 5-dice damage to my mage.  After the attack he immediately used his Mage's quickcast action to cast [mwcard=MWSTX2FFI06]Defend[/mwcard] on the Guardian angel.  After my appreciation of such a nice play, I noticed that he had also removed two of the damage markers on the Guardian angel.  What followed was a discussion on whether the Defend spell should trigger the Guardian angel's heal.

The exact text on the card is "when Guardian Angel chooses the guard action, she may heal up to 2 points of damage from herself".  I argued that this wording implies that the heal will only trigger if the Guardian Angel uses her own action to guard and that this heal will not trigger from having the Defend spell cast upon her.  My opponent however argued that he had read that as "whenever the Guardian Angel goes on guard, heal 2 health".  Whilst this rule interpretation didn't make much of a difference on the outcome of the match, it would be great to get a clarification here.

You're right imaginator that these sort of topics can rapidly spiral into a bad area but, as ringkichard has said, actually I've found this current thread to be a very reasonable discussion of the topic and I for one would like to see more thoughtful discussion on this topic (provided it stays civil that is).

To get back on topic: from reading the forum responses here it seems that we as community are a bit divided on this Toni Darling campaign.  If I can be as bold to make some summaries of the arguments provided here it seems that people fall roughly into two 'camps' on this issue:

1) People who don't mind the campaign seem to be citing arguments such as 'she is appropriately dressed within the context of cosplay community', 'she has a right to wear what she likes: who are we to say what is appropriate', 'it isn't really for existing fans anyway: it is to promote the game to the cosplay community', 'she isn't terribly revealingly dressed: I've seen more flesh in other situations' and 'Arcane Wonders are simply employing successful marketing strategies to promote their product'.
2) People who dislike the campaign seem to be citing arguments such as 'using images of women in revealing attire to promote a board game is not really appropriate', 'campaign smacks of a sex-sells style of promotion that should really be left in the past', 'it's unlikely that the cosplayers are really going to buy the product anyway so the campaign seems rather pointless', and 'Toni Darling doesn't appear to look that interested in the game'

I have respect for all of these arguments and can appreciate the arguments made from both 'sides'.  I must admit to falling more into the second group on this issue.

However, regardless of the validity of the arguments presented on either side of the debate, it is definitely clear that this advertising campaign, when taken collectively with complaints from some about the depictions of female characters in the card art, has led to Arcane Wonders having to defend against accusations of sexism (rightly or wrongly).  This topic keeps coming up in both Arcane Wonders own forums (>>here<< and >>here<<) and on Board Game Geek (>>here<< and >>here<<) as well as being on many other threads that have since been deleted.  I do therefore believe this is a real issue that needs to be addressed.

My feeling is that if they tried to tone down their images on their female character card art (more like [mwcard=FWC13]Selesius, the East Wind[/mwcard] and less like [mwcard=MW1C39]Valshalla, Lightning Angel[/mwcard]) then the people from group 1 would still buy the product (as I doubt group 1 only buys Mage Wars for the sexy card art) and you wouldn't risk alienating the buyers in group 2.  Even if you do believe all of this talk of sexism is nonsense, if Arcane Wonders adopted this strategy you'd benefit from having a larger player base and not have to endure endless discussions on sexism in the forums.  I would find it easier to sell the game to my gaming group (some of which have definitely been put-off by the card art).  >>Here<< is a very good blog post about the marketing benefits of not trying to use images of women in chainmail bikinis to sell your fantasy product

I also don't believe that the Toni Darling campaign will bring in more cosplayers to the community than potential players it will alienate but I guess time will tell on that one and I don't have Arcane Wonder's sales figures to hand to test that theory.

Well my action markers have been ordered.  So I'll keep people updated on how that goes.

I'm noticing that many of the listings for the new action markers actually talks about them being green and yellow, despite showing the purple and grey action marker image (Arcane Wonder's own store does this too).  I'm guessing this is just a description mistake but I there's half a chance that I'll get the yellow and green ones in the post.

Just in case you were feeling unappreciated for all your work on the SBB: thank you Pixel for all your work.

I would second this!  I'd love to see the newly updated cards in the spellbook builder although I appreciate that updating it with the FiF stuff is probably most people's priority right now.

This has been done as a request to update the errata art to the Card Database by me a couple of times. I really hope it happens one of these days!

Thank you ever so much for doing that.  Fingers crossed.  If there is anything I can do to help then I'd be happy to provide some of my programming skills.