Is bleed supposed to be blood?


Rules Questions

RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32

So, going through the creature type entires, I noticed that onstructs, undead, and elementals are specifically noted to be immune to bleed - but oozes and plants aren't, and nor are inevitables, even though they're noted as having all the other immunities of a construct.

Also the Bleeding Attack rogue talent "can cause living opponents to bleed" - 'living', not just 'creatures with blood'.

Do do all living things 'bleed' regardless of physiology? I could possibly stretch to the idea that non-blood creatures are just leaking different vital fluids, like sap or something, but I really can't imagine, like, a treant gushing sap from a wound to the extent of mortal danger. And oozes are just puddles of liquid to start with, unless they've all got some kind of membrane or something. (Unrelated: they're not listed as immune to sickening or nausea, either.)

Is there any rules-block that clarifies bleed? I know of the glossary entry, but it doesn't have anything about the above.

Grand Lodge

I could imagine most living creatures to be capable of losing blood or other such substances.

If a Treant gains bleed 1, without proper healing it will die in 114 rounds, or roughly eleven and a half minutes, since a treant is huge, it would make sense if it had more 'blood' or sap to lose.

Inevitable are basically constructs, and since they aren't immune to bleed, I would imagine that they have some sort of axiomatic fluid-thing that keeps them running, and you could make them bleed that.

Oozes- well, that would be a little bit weird. I *could* see them having some sort of membrane, but it seems a little far fetched (because of engulf). Seems pretty confusing to me.


Inevitables have Regeneration and thus are functionally immune to Bleed (unless the regeneration is shut down).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rules are always written with certain assumptions in mind, and if you look long enough you can often find cases where those assumptions may not be valid. I would recommend doing what seems reasonable and in line with the spirit of the rules.

If you feel that Bleed shouldn't apply to Inevitables, then when the rogue sneak attacks an Inevitable just say that the Inevitable does bleed even though it was slashed where the rogue figured an artery would be if it had one. Alternatively it could leak oil, lawful-fluid, cheese whiz, or whatever, at least until it regenerates.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Bleed doesn't require blood.


Oozes bleed all their oozey goodness.


Tammy just wants their plasma.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Is bleed supposed to be blood? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.