From Exalted - Unofficial Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Raiment of Devotees' Benefit

Artifact: 3
Commitment: 6 motes

The Raiment of Devotees' Benefit was said to be created by Duffu-Manu, the God of Sleaze, in order to further his domain by expanding the capactiy for lewd comments to be made, even in the heat of combat. Appearing as Martial Arts Gi, however made of fine silk that seems to emphasise key areas of the wearers figure, and providing high-quality soak (6L/9B) its powers come to the fore in active use.
While providing its mystical protection, tears very easily which in no-way hinders its ability to defend its wearer in any way, shape or form, unless you include their modesty. The Gi may be reduced to the barest of shreds of clothing, and provides its full functionality.
As a result, all members of the opposite sex wishing to attack the wearer is at a difficulty equal to the wearers appearance due to being lulled by the "accidentally" exposed flesh.

However, the user must take a Valour check at the beginning of every [6-Temperance] turns to continue fighting, if they fail this check, they can only defend themselves as they attempet to hide their shame, a botch causes them to be unable to do anything bar cover up, or run away. They may roll another valour check the following turn, in order to re-enter combat.

The Gi also repairs itself, all that need be done is for the torn peices to be lain back in place once the user is able too (after combat usually), and any lost peices of the Gi meerly regrow the following morning, returning the Raiment of Devotees' Benefit to it's whole state, waiting to be torn anew.


Are you sure it should be every (Temperance) turns? That means low temperance characters (such as a cheap harlot) will be checking every round to see if they continue fighting, and a prudish monk would be checking every 5 rounds. My gut reaction is that it should be (5-Temperance) or some such. -- GreenLantern

Thanks for pointing that out GL, I knew I had somthing twisted in there, corrections made as needed - ArabianNinja

"wishing to attack the wearer is at a difficulty equal to the wearers appearance" Are we missing a word here? Is it a Willpower roll against difficulty Appearance? Conviction? Essence? Charisma-Temperance? - Trithne, who only wishes Naughty Lotus Style wasn't Sidereal.

It isn't Sidereal, you big silly. It's Celestial...DeathBySurfeit
Positive it said "Sidereal". Hrm. I need to go back to comprehension. - Trithne
Maybe I need to re-word that, opponents difficulty to hit the wearer is the wearers appearance, so as opposed to the normal diff 1, it can be diff 5. Of course theres the subsequent, and continuous, valour checks to keep fighting... - ArabianNinja
That still doesn't make sense to me. As far as I'm concerned, difficulty to hit the wearer is their parry or dodge. Nothing else. Where are we pulling these static values from? - Trithne
The first edition rules, perhaps. :) - DeadManSeven
Some of us prefer them, even now. I've never used the difficulty to hit is a fixed value unless it's an extra. And Extras have no right to wear this. - Trithne
But what about the really pretty ones from house Cynis :)? In any case if you dont like the increased difficulty to hit, you may impliment somthing else such as forcing temperance checks at [wearers appearance] difficulty to prevent them from attacking for [Wearers Essence] turns. These rules are simply ones I made, but if you like the item feel free to sub in what you feel works best for you. - ArabianNinja, who is loving the attention to his not-so-modest, but some-what-humble, artifact.
Argh, too much indenting It works, although it's a rather powerful effect. I suppose they still get to defend themselves while being kicked into puddles of their own drool and other, less savoury fluids. - Trithne
I'll say. In any case, remember the golden rule of exalted, if you don't like it, change it. If you enjoy the thematics of the fan-service armour, and you find the mechanics lacking, then feel free to change it to suit your preferences. It's not like I'll beat down your door and force you to use it right, eh? - ArabianNinja, Door Beatin' since '97.

Minor point: there is no 'n' in "raiment". - Wordman, who's spelling sucks even more

Irony! ...DeathBySurfeit
I should have spelled "spelling" with only one 'l' as well. -- Wordman
Thanks for pointing that out, I changed the text, but have no idea how to change the spelling of the page itself without making a new page. - ArabianNinja
Basically, you can't. You could make a new page and redirect this one there, but it's probably not worth it ^_^
-- Darloth
However, it's very very easy to make a new page that's exactly the same as the old page except for the name, and then look at where the old page backlinks to and replace them all. - DeadManSeven
Done-and-Done. And I mean done ;) - ArabianNinja

This was meant to be specifically a clothing type defensive artifact, not armour, and yet I used the word armour 3 times, so I decided to clean it up. - ArabianNinja