5
\$\begingroup\$

This is the full text of the Implant Bomb feat :

Prerequisites: Heal 5 ranks, delayed bomb alchemist discovery.

Benefit: You may implant a bomb in a willing or helpless creature (a mindless creature under your control, such as a zombie, counts as willing for this purpose). This takes 1 hour and expends 1 use of your bomb ability for the day. When the implanted creature dies or is destroyed, the bomb detonates in the creature’s square as if it were a delayed bomb set by you (though you can set the bomb’s damage to less than your normal bomb damage). You can use any bomb-affecting discoveries on this implanted bomb (acid bomb, frost bomb, smoke bomb, and so on) as normal. The bomb automatically detonates 24 hours after you implant it in the creature.

If you expend 150 gp worth of alchemical reagents per die of the bomb’s damage (for example, 750 gp for a 5d6 bomb), the bomb does not automatically detonate after 24 hours, and only detonates if the creature dies or is destroyed (24 hours after implantation, this bomb no longer counts toward your daily total).

Implanting a bomb is as invasive as using the Heal skill to treat deadly wounds and leaves surgical scars unless the creature is healed by magic or abilities such as regeneration or fast healing. Some creatures (such as oozes, elementals, and creatures with the incorporeal quality) cannot have bombs implanted in them. Removing an implanted bomb requires a Heal check to treat deadly wounds, followed by a dispel magic spell or Disable Device check to neutralize the bomb (DC = 11 + alchemist's caster level).

The 5 ranks in Heal required and the last paragraph imply that this feat is made to be used on living creatures, but the zombie given as an example in the first paragraph implies that an undead is valid too. Does this mean that any type of corporeal creature (even a construct like an animated object) can get a bomb implanted ?

\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, yes you can!

There is really no reason why you shouldn't be able to. The ruletext indicates a few exception for quite understandable reasons: some creatures simply don't have any anatomy so you can't really trap-bomb them. Following this spirit you shouldn't be able to implant a bomb in an amalgamation, not because it's a construct but because it doesn't have any anatomy you can implant a bomb on. Following the same logic it seems fair to consider swarms as non-valid.

Considering the Heal skill, it sure seems disorienting. RAW you have to make this check even on a construct, but I would recommend to houserule that you do a Disable Device or a Knowledge:Engineering check instead.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Good catch on swarms. \$\endgroup\$ – ShadowKras Oct 14 '16 at 11:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ They aren't affected due to being immune to any effects that target a specific number of creatures though. \$\endgroup\$ – ShadowKras Oct 14 '16 at 11:38
1
\$\begingroup\$

An interesting question--and a truly gruesome use of that ability.

Re-reading the rules of the Heal skill (which is what we're looking at now), it doesn't say anything about Constructs, nor does it say anything about living creatures--so that would make me think that this is possible. However, the Bestiary strongly implies that constructs are not affected by things like Heal spells or the Heal skill.

Cannot heal damage on its own, but often can be repaired via exposure to a certain kind of effect (see the creature’s description for details) or through the use of the Craft Construct feat. Constructs can also be healed through spells such as make whole. A construct with the fast healing special quality still benefits from that quality.

So this does not seem to be covered in RAW. I would, as a GM, not allow this power to affect constructs via the heal skill. However, I might allow the character to do so if they have the Craft Construct feat, and/or five levels in an appropriate skill (perhaps Knowledge: Constructs or something similar).

\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

It will depend on your GM.

The ability does not say you cant implant bombs on a Construct, but it does say that some creatures cannot be affected, then gives some examples of those, which doesn't seem to be the only exceptions:

Some creatures (such as oozes, elementals, and creatures with the incorporeal quality) cannot have bombs implanted in them.

This leaves a window for table variation until further clarification is given by the authors, some GM's will allow it, some won't.

A GM will have to think about why an Ooze or Elemental cannot be affected, and decide if this construct could be affected or not. The way i understand it, this restriction is related to the creature's anatomy or physical conditions. A few traits that are common between oozes and elementals:

(Oozes) Immunity to poison, sleep effects, paralysis, polymorph, and stunning.

(Elementals) Immunity to bleed, paralysis, poison, sleep effects, and stunning.

(Both) Not subject to critical hits or flanking. Does not take additional damage from precision-based attacks, such as sneak attack.

Oozes eat and breathe, but do not sleep.

Elementals do not breathe, eat, or sleep.

A Construct has a few traits in common with these creatures, such as:

Immunity to bleed, disease, death effects, necromancy effects, paralysis, poison, sleep effects, and stunning.

Constructs do not breathe, eat, or sleep.

I would probably (house) rule that if the creature can suffer from critical hits, it has an anatomy that can be modified, and a bomb can be implanted. But instead of using Heal, i would require a Craft check, using the same skill that is used to build the construct (on their individual page).

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The reason to exclude oozes is obvious : their very malleable form makes any kind of implant impossible on them. Elementals are composed entirely of one element, either earth, wind, water and fire, then implanting anything into them is impossible as well. It looks more like a matter of "can anything be possibly attached to that creature ?" than a matter of creature type. \$\endgroup\$ – user26561 Oct 13 '16 at 19:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ Oozes are known to hold objects inside them (see gelatinous cube), and that explanation doesn't work for earth elementals, which are solid in nature. But yes, it seems to be a case of whether or not the creature's body is maleable. \$\endgroup\$ – ShadowKras Oct 13 '16 at 19:44
0
\$\begingroup\$

Yes it means exactly that. A mindless creature such as an ooze or animated creature could be implanted with a bomb that way.

See the ranks of Heal needed as a way to implant the device without impeding the creature.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to RPG.SE! Please take a look through the tour( rpg.stackexchange.com/tour) when you get the chance. The OP mentioned in the description, though, that "Some creatures (such as oozes, elementals, and creatures with the incorporeal quality) cannot have bombs implanted in them" \$\endgroup\$ – UrhoKarila Oct 12 '16 at 21:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ Ooze's are explicitly called out as not able to be implanted, but the spirit of your post is correct. \$\endgroup\$ – Shem Oct 12 '16 at 21:34

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy