Camarilla Addendum Now Live

Apr 01, 2007 19:02

Dear members ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 23

camarillamst April 2 2007, 02:19:00 UTC

Here's a brief changelog of typos/clarifications added by affiliate request --

- Doubling, not multiplying modifiers fix (as it applies to Speed and ( ... )

Reply

camarillamst April 2 2007, 17:00:47 UTC
For what it's worth -- I took out a comment made here by someone suggesting that there was a negative reference to a national affiliate in the changelog, which seemed bizarre. The reason why we refer to one of the affiliates in that changelog is to mention why a substantive change was made -- one affiliate asked for particular wording in the March edit and then changed the wording to something else, and it seemed reasonable to let people to know about it (since we've in the past been asked why changes like that were made). Same re: the grappling/immobilize question, this was brought up to an ANST who then passed it on. Those seemed some of the most notable 'bigger' changes that had seen a lot of discussion in March. I figured people would actually be *happy* to see that the stuff they brought to their NSTs' attention had been taken into account and reflected by the final document, but I guess some people take the documentation of that process as some sort of weird barb. Huh.

Reply


smckeown April 2 2007, 03:28:35 UTC
And this one's *not* an April Fools joke, right?

-- Sean McKeown
US 2002045258

Reply

camarillamst April 2 2007, 03:41:19 UTC

Right. But by all means, refer to it as the "April Fool's Addendum" if it makes you happier. :)

Reply


scalpel April 2 2007, 04:41:00 UTC
Any word on when the US Addendum is coming out? I'm still keeping my fingers crossed that it'll fix the Devotions Approval weirdness.

== Jon Wilkie (a.k.a. "Scalpel")
=== Member of House Sthavirasabha
=== E-mail - cam.goob@gmail.com
=== Camarilla Member US2002022839

Reply

mithras April 2 2007, 04:45:51 UTC
Which devotion approval weirdness would that be?

Reply

camarillamst April 2 2007, 05:56:24 UTC

You're not the only one wondering about that. Surely it'd have come up as a bug report by now!? :-)

Reply

mithras April 2 2007, 06:32:41 UTC
I think it did.

I think it was the bit where Custom Devotions were Global Approval under the Universal section and National Approval in the Requiem section, which was fixed in the current version.

Reply


Kindred Legend? derrickburbee April 2 2007, 14:12:34 UTC
Characters that had Covenant Status 5 prior to March-1-2007 acquire a dot of the Merit Kindred
Legend for free.

This is missing in the new addendum while it was in the old one. Any reason for that? I was also wondering, since it has been said before, if there was going to be a document released showing some of the reasonings behind some of the changes. Thanks!

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

Re: Kindred Legend? blujay718 April 2 2007, 17:18:54 UTC
Because the rule was a bit silly?

That's debatable. Considering the approval has been reduced to High for Status 5, it was one way of noting the difference between those who had gone through the rigor of a Top Approval versus the many who will get it at high, which does not seem unreasonable to me.

Hopefully, they'll have come up with something else in the Status document we're waiting on, but who knows. Status in general has me too disgusted to hope for much.

Jay Rivera
US2002034107

Reply


Spirit Cruac terrydrehammer April 3 2007, 01:11:49 UTC
Crossposted ot the Crone OOC List too...

****

Maybe it's just the confusion of wording with the addendum but...

"Although Spirit Crúac is sanctioned at Low Approval, it requires High Approval to mechanically affect player characters, as per this
document. Spirit Crúac rituals are High Approval for True Crones."

Does this mean that...

A. Spirit Cruac is low approval
B. Spirit Cruac is high approval
or
C. Spirit Cruac is it's whole other line of Cruac (such as the
Dragons with Blood Alchemy/Spoiling, on top of Coils).

Cause I was under the impression Spirit Cruac was ritual based to begin with...

--
Bill Malvasi
US2002021749

Reply


Leave a comment

Up