My group of players are entering the final act of Long Arm of the Hutt. In order to have a chance against Teemo the Hutt they bought a Thermal Detonator from Geonosis. Now we are discussing how it would work against the Hutt.

Going by fluff the thing can level a building, but then again if you go by the mechanical rules it probably doesn't even kill a Hutt Crime Lord on a normal hit. The other thing is that it is slightly funny if the blast doesn't activate. If the Hutt dies then it can be that the detonator landed in his mouth, but if it doesn't kill him it's just weird. Also if the blast activates the thrower will take blast damage and disintegrate himself (short range and short blast radius).

And since Thermal Detonator has vicious and breach, does its blast damage have those same characteristics?

How would you handle it?

If it lands in his mouth I'd call that an automatic crit at least.

Blast does share the Vicious and Breach effects.

Normal damage, have your best Range(L) guy throw it and hope for 10 uncancelled successes I guess....

You're the GM and can override mechanics for the sake of the story and common sense. That Hutt eats a thermal det, he blows. The players'll have to dodge the bits of Hutt though.

Yeah I'd say if he eats it, that's that. The trick (and where Adversary comes into play) is getting him to eat it.

It has a timer setting if you want to both throw accurately and have time to vacate the premises you can do it.

Alternatively, you could allow the use of a Triumph(along with success) to just annihilate the target if you successfully hit it(The Hutt swallows the detonator, an unforgettable expression crosses his pudgy face, and then he explodes in a shower of gore)

You are totally bypassing the Hutt's soak too. So if he's taken any damage prior to the detonator going off it is likely it will kill him. He's going to take a minimum of 21 damage on a successful attack. He only needs to suffer 9 damage before the Detonator will just kill him.

Yeah I'd say if he eats it, that's that. The trick (and where Adversary comes into play) is getting him to eat it.

An opposed Brawn check(with some boost die because of the Hutt being Awkward) to force it down his yawning gullet.

Maybe require a successful brawl check against the Hutt.

Yeah I'd say if he eats it, that's that. The trick (and where Adversary comes into play) is getting him to eat it.

An opposed Brawn check(with some boost die because of the Hutt being Awkward) to force it down his yawning gullet.

Maybe require a successful brawl check against the Hutt.

Yeah, and an appropriate place for Adversary to make that quite a bit harder. Though I like it.

How would you handle it?

If I wanted the TD to be able to one-shot the hutt, I'd reduce his WT to 20. The stats int he book are recommendations, not hard numbers, you're expected to adjust them to fit your game.

As for the enclosed space issue, well that's something your player will have to figure out.

You're the GM and can override mechanics for the sake of the story and common sense.

The thing is that the players want to know in advance how the detonator works within game mechanics in order to decide how to use it.

But yeah, if there's enough advantages and/or triumph the Hutt swallows the detonator and blows up.

Timer is kind of tricky as it allows the people to run away from the explosion before it happens. Hutt might not be able to make it far enough in time, but still I'm thinking of giving the thrower a possibility to use maneuver to take cover after throwing and before exploding if the detonator is set on impact. Any ideas on this?

The thing is that the players want to know in advance how the detonator works within game mechanics in order to decide how to use it.

Don't give them so many details about how you would handle it that you encourage them metagaming the encounter. There are rules for the TD in the book, that should be more than enough information for them to decide the best way to use it, and they're not entitled to know the Hutt's Brawn or WT or whether being in the room with it exploding won't kill him but him eating it will. If it fails to kill him, there's Plot. If it does kill him, other Plot. Win-win.

You're the GM and can override mechanics for the sake of the story and common sense.

The thing is that the players want to know in advance how the detonator works within game mechanics in order to decide how to use it.

But yeah, if there's enough advantages and/or triumph the Hutt swallows the detonator and blows up.

Timer is kind of tricky as it allows the people to run away from the explosion before it happens. Hutt might not be able to make it far enough in time, but still I'm thinking of giving the thrower a possibility to use maneuver to take cover after throwing and before exploding if the detonator is set on impact. Any ideas on this?

You can simply say that any maneuvers you use after throwing the detonator happen roughly simultaneously. At least enough to where you can get clear of the blast.

So a PC could advance into short, toss detonator, and then suffer strain to move out of short. And you can handwave the blast to not be resolved till the PC is clear(after all even without using the timer there is still a delay)

And I just realized that the base Hutt Crimelord stats in the book don't have Adversary. That seems odd, but then again it does seem that a Hutt wouldn't exactly be difficult to attack.

And I just realized that the base Hutt Crimelord stats in the book don't have Adversary. That seems odd, but then again it does seem that a Hutt wouldn't exactly be difficult to attack.

I used the Hutt crime lord as-is in an adventure Saturday. He doesn't have it because he doesn't need it, the guy is a tank on his own, and absolutely pwns in social encounters.

Yeah I'd say if he eats it, that's that. The trick (and where Adversary comes into play) is getting him to eat it.

An opposed Brawn check(with some boost die because of the Hutt being Awkward) to force it down his yawning gullet.

Maybe require a successful brawl check against the Hutt.

That was exactly my plan regarding our fight with Teemo, but I was going to use two stun grenades, not a Thermal Detonator -- TDs just have too many drawbacks and I wouldn't want to see a Despair on that.

I was foiled in this goal by the Duros in our party that decided he'd take the power core of a Super Battledroid and set that up as an explosive charge right behind Teemo. And even on 1Y1G versus Daunting, he still managed to get net successes and advantage. The GM did some reading and then decided that a power core of this sort was kind of like a Thermal Detonator, only stronger. So, Teemo basically just "disappeared" in a blinding and deafening flash of light, along with all the minions who were standing right next to him.

That **** Duros. ;-)

And I just realized that the base Hutt Crimelord stats in the book don't have Adversary. That seems odd, but then again it does seem that a Hutt wouldn't exactly be difficult to attack.

Adversary doesn't have to have IC justification. It's reasonable to view it purely as an OOC construct to make important enemies harder to affect because they're Important To The Story.

I know you can add or subtract characteristics to suit your need, but then it seems silly that the big nasty Hutts would have no ranks in Adversary as a baseline while the Black Sun Vigo would have 3. Any Hutt worthy of the title Crime Lord would be a pretty nasty opponent.

At least 1 rank would be sufficient.

Blast does share the Vicious and Breach effects.

I cannot find this rule from anywhere. Is there an official ruling or rule somewhere? Does the same go with Stun Grenade's disorient???

Blast does share the Vicious and Breach effects.

I cannot find this rule from anywhere. Is there an official ruling or rule somewhere? Does the same go with Stun Grenade's disorient???

See the first question under "Gear, Equipment, and Qualities" in the Developer Answered Questions thread. Or alternatively, you can see the original post here. It doesn't call out the vicious and breach quality for Thermal Detonators, but it does mention others, so the assumption is that all applicable qualities of an explosive applies to the blast damage as well.