In a worldbuilding project I am working on, its main focus is around a zerg-like hivemind species hell bent on devouring biomass, while also having the ability to weave their genomes to form specialized bioforms to suit their needs. They utilize a variety of biological technology like living guns, specialized bioforms acting as tanks, etc. This hivemind utilizes swarm tactics, relying on sheer numbers to dominate the battlefield.

I had an idea of specialized plants that grow living guns for the footsoldiers of the swarm. It would utilize Hydrogen peroxide inside a separate chamber (With proper protection of course), I chose this chemical because it's a component of fuel used by rockets which could act as gunpowder substitute means of propulsion for its different ammunition., and it can be produced by living beings, example: Bombardier beetle.

With the gunpowder issue solved, all I'm struggling to think of right now is for it's design. What would it look like? Would it mimic the looks of modern weaponry despite it's biological origins?

How would it compare to an assault rifle like the AK-47, if the ammunition used is of the same caliber?

And lastly, the plants are designed for mass production + on the go, an unarmed footsoldier would just run and grab a newly grown weapon from the plant, and will grow another one for the next soldier. How long would this process of growing the weapon and ammunition take, if the energy needs are met, and the genome of the plant is supplied with enough instructions and information to form such a weapon?

Example Art: Look how fleshy it is

  • $\begingroup$ Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. $\endgroup$
    – Community Bot
    Commented Feb 12 at 12:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also - I believe I've already answered this question: worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/246477/… $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 12 at 21:03
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Hi @ArcticSad. (a) This site allows only one question per post. We're usually lenient with new users, but there's enough wrong with this Q to justify its closure to give you time to reason what you really need to ask. (b) When you see that comment from the automated Community BOT, it means your question has failed Stack Exchange's automatic heuristic check for a "good question." It means you really need to edit your question. (c) "Feasibility" is a loaded word here. We help people build imaginary worlds, in which everything is always feasible... (*Continued*) $\endgroup$
    – JBH
    Commented Feb 12 at 22:36
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ ... (d) The design or look-and-feel of any object is an off-topic question here. Remember that Stack Exchange expects questions that are reasonably objective. Look-and-feel is never reasonably objective. We close such questions regularly. (e) Comparisons to Real World weapons are entirely up to you. Your weapon can be more or less powerful as you desire. It's not our place to judge since that's an issue of the story, not a rule of the world. Finally, (f) the process will take as long as you wish. This is due to ... (*Continued*) $\endgroup$
    – JBH
    Commented Feb 12 at 22:38
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ One last thing: this is a cool idea. Don't discard it simply because it hasn't enough scientific basis. That's boring anyway. Science Fiction embraces the idea of "what if?" Otherwise the Starcraft games and Starship Troopers stories and film franchise wouldn't have been as popular as they were and are. $\endgroup$
    – JBH
    Commented Feb 12 at 22:44


Browse other questions tagged .