# Forum > Gaming > Roleplaying Games > D&D 5e/Next >  Dust Devil discussion ported from the Faerie Fire thread

## Segev

> Dust Devil works a certain way based on RAW. The RAW way Dust Devil works is disappointing for many tables. Thus, players at those tables should work with their DM to see if something other than RAW is allowed.


This is taken from the _faerie fire_ thread on dim lighting. My question is entirely off-topic for that, though. 

I, too, have read _dust devil_ and found it disappointing. What do people think it is "meant" to be, and how would they better achieve it? In an earlier post, somebody mentioned that it doesn't do what players might expect until they read the specific rules. What is it players might expect, vs. what it does?

What it does, per the RAW, is a little bit of damage and force a strength save or shove somebody out of its space, and can create a mini "fog cloud" type effect if it blows over loose dirt, leaves, or other such detritus. It can be moved around freely to shove people around and the like.

The damage is anemic, and the shove effect is hard to pull off. What might people actually have expected it to do before they read the rules, do you think? What suggestions might one have for somebody whose DM responds to the quoted suggestion with, "Well, what other than the RAW would you like it to do?"

----------


## Pooky the Imp

For me, the most obvious thing is that it should either damage creatures that _start_ their turns in the effect or else be able to damage and shove creatures it touches when it moves.

Otherwise, creatures can just walk away from the effect on their turn.

----------


## J-H

I've used it once.  Unfortunately, it was a single enemy, so he kept moving away from it by circling the ally of mine he was fighting.  I think it's better in a more complex combat where "just walk away" results in eating Opportunity Attacks.  It also does better when you want to block line of sight for enemy archers/casters, and they can't just walk around it, so you really want to use this in a battle that has actual terrain and multiple enemies.

----------


## Amnestic

If I want a fog cloud effect I'll probably just cast fog cloud, which is one spell level lower.

I wonder if scrapping that part, changing the damage to start of turn, and if creatures fail their save they're additionally blinded until the end of their turn, would be enough? If still too weak extend blind duration to end of your turn instead of end of blinded creature's turn.

----------


## tiornys

Dust Devil's primary purpose is to be mobile Fog Cloud. If it's not being mobile Fog Cloud, it's not worth casting (whether or not it's worth casting as mobile Fog Cloud is a separate question).  This is why the damage/push happen at end of turn--if they happened at start of turn they'd be ejecting the subject from the mobile Fog Cloud before it's had a chance to impact their turn.

edit to add: adding a 1 round Blindness effect would definitely be a good rider if moving the damage/push to start of turn.

----------


## Segev

Hm. If "mobile _fog cloud_" is the intent of the spell, then it should not have the "if there's loose debris" clause. It should just do it.

----------


## Phhase

It's all Ask Your DM stuff, but I like to throw sharp stuff like glass and caltrops into the whirlwind to make a blender. And using like, a mini parachute, and the dust devil's pushing power, ride on top of it. Mostly for cool factor, but still.

----------


## MrStabby

I just assumed it was bad.  No greater purpose.  No near miss.  No aspiration for anything useful.  Just something to fill up sace on the page till  player gets to something fun and useful.

----------


## Segev

> I just assumed it was bad.  No greater purpose.  No near miss.  No aspiration for anything useful.  Just something to fill up sace on the page till  player gets to something fun and useful.


That seems like a lot of work for something never intended to be used. Or am I missing your point?

----------


## MrStabby

> That seems like a lot of work for something never intended to be used. Or am I missing your point?


My point is the opposite. It looks like the spell took far too little work.

I think some spells are bad.  Obviously bad.  I think some spells are so obviously bad that they were never really meant to be good.

If you sell a book with some dud options in, the main thing is you still sold the book.

----------


## Segev

> My point is the opposite. It looks like the spell took far too little work.
> 
> I think some spells are bad.  Obviously bad.  I think some spells are so obviously bad that they were never really meant to be good.
> 
> If you sell a book with some dud options in, the main thing is you still sold the book.


Okay, but if they're just too lazy to make the content, what do they do? Throw darts at a dart board for the level, components, and effects of spells?

----------


## MrStabby

> Okay, but if they're just too lazy to make the content, what do they do? Throw darts at a dart board for the level, components, and effects of spells?


Well, into the realms of speculation now but my guess is that they wanted a level 2 spell so they made it level 2.

Sometimes a spell ne exists in another edition and they import it to 5th.

I don't think all spells are this badly written.  Some are lovingly crafted, but others seem very perfunctory.  I think when they are not looking to spend a lot of time on a spell they tend to lowball the power as at least an unusable spell won't do wiser damage to the game.

If this hypothesis is broadly right, then I would expect some relationship between power/balance of a spell and number of sentences of description.

----------


## tiornys

5E Dust Devil is a translation of 2nd ed. Dust Devil.  The potential debris cloud was probably the most significant aspect of that version too.

----------


## Snails

> Well, into the realms of speculation now but my guess is that they wanted a level 2 spell so they made it level 2.
> 
> Sometimes a spell ne exists in another edition and they import it to 5th.
> 
> I don't think all spells are this badly written.


I agree with this spell simply being underdeveloped.  My best guess is the reasoning went something like this: "I have a 2nd level spell from a previous edition.  I want a 2nd level spell for 5e.  Let me convert....Okay.  Well, it is obviously too good for a 1st level spells and too weak for a 3rd level spell, so it is a 2nd level spell.  Mission accomplished."

We might hope that the developer went through the effort of _tuning_ the power level of every spell to have _play value_ that makes it competitive with other somewhat similar spells.

In this case, assuming any effort was made, I suppose the reasoning was: "Well, it is like a Flaming Sphere.  Since it has this useful obscuring effect, the damage is less."

Of course, nobody here would probably accept that reasoning as fully baked. Removing the pro-active means of forcing a save to avoid damage has the effect of greatly reducing expected damage.

My fix: Boost damage to 2d8, and leave the spell as a peculiar effect that often just chases enemies around, albeit when something gets damage it would be a decent amount.  It becomes actually quite good in certain restricted terrain.

----------

