"It is with the recommendation of the parties signed below that the sanctity of man be upheld and the rule of law observed. We hereby acknowledge this convention and its amendments and urge other parties to join us in this triumph of peace and cooperation."

-President Jacob Zuma of South Africa


The moments after Suitfall sparked international support of stringent military laws restricting the free movement and privacy of suit owners. Though the response differed from country to country, the common person was cognizant of the power of the selected and the horrors that a minority of them wrought upon their communities.

It was in this environment that some Suiters, fascinated with the chivalric practices of ancient knights, created the "Armored Code," a loose set of rules that respected the right to give up arms and the laws and statues of the land. Though in the minority, the code caught momentum and eventually reached the ears of civilian governments.

Initially, the code was considered a quirk, an inconsistently applied behavior that didn't amount to any real effect. Yet as notable vigilantes broke into fame amongst their communities and countries began to shore up their defenses with soldiers permanently bound to their suits, public opinion on Suiters became mixed.

Having lost influence in the sub-Saharan sphere after The Vox Populi established its operations in Mogadishu, President Zuma yearned to regain the political sway that South Africa once commanded upon the continent. Taking advantage of the situation, South African president Jacob Zuma began negotiations with other smaller countries that could only afford to maintain law and order within their respective jurisdictions. Though more powerful, military state countries did not attend (notably Russia), the South African state issued a general invitation towards UN member states to attend negotiations. Eventually, the movement gathered momentum and the Geneva Convention on the Arms Control of Armored Suits with Bound Ownership was held, with the resulting legislation benefiting governments considerably more than Suiters.

The initial proposal not only failed to attract certain major Suiter factions, it also failed to appeal to the United States, which refused to attend the talks on the grounds that "the United States does not negotiate with terrorist organizations or international criminals." Hardliners followed suit, painting Zuma's efforts as yet another meaningless chapter in the laughable body of international law. Yet, his efforts attracted much attention amongst the human rights communities, and as such President Zuma was placed under consideration for the Nobel Peace Prize as a nominee (the Nobel committee does not comment on their decision-making process).

Zuma's clout in the region did not significantly rise as military order rose in popularity, but the resulting effects of the convention laws are still contested.



Original ContractEdit

  1. A pilot who ejects from their armor is free to escape the battle with out fear of pursuit, harm or death
  2. Pilots are beholden unto the laws of the region, country or state that they are in at the current time
  3. Pilots will be held responsible for their actions and are subject to the rule of law

Convention LawEdit





  • Government support of standards placed on Suiters that limit their destructive capabilities
  • Judicial support for a framework for the treatment of Suiters given the binding nature of ownership and in some cases the complete fusion of man and machine
  • Human rights entities in support of an expansion of basic human rights that can extend to terrorists and other similarly-branded individuals
  • Families of those directly affected by Suitfall.



  • Many Suiters do not think they are equitable.
  • Lack of confidence in the number of adherents.
  • Recognition of Suiter governments, especially those labeled as terrorist organizations, as being legitimate entities.
  • Public backlash from the perceived inability for local law enforcement to adequately enforce the standards on Suiters.
  • Gun control supporters dislike the increase in permissible arms.