Fog cloud and wind effects: disperse vs. dispel

[Strife2002]

So for spells like fog cloud, they mention that wind effects can "disperse" the cloud. Does that also mean they effectively dispel the effect? Fog cloud has a long duration, so if the fog is just "dispersed" wouldn't the fog then continue "emanating from the point you designate" once the wind effect ends?

[Azothath]

fog cloud
yes, disperse -> permanently end the spell effect (effectively dispel or counter the spell). There isn't a gradual change unless the GM house rules it. It is assumed that the wind covers the AoE of the fog cloud.

while not specifically mentioned in fog cloud see obscuring mist as most GMs use fire effects to end the fog/mist effect in overlapping areas of effect(AoE). On the caster's turn the fog cloud ongoing spread may fill in the AoE that was eliminated (GM prerogative as I'm not finding specific verbage about mist/fog/clouds interaction with fire). The grey area comes from the general text in the CRB, see below.

CRB, Duration; Subjects, Effects, and Areas wrote:

If the spell affects creatures directly, the result travels with the subjects for the spell’s duration. If the spell creates an effect, the effect lasts for the duration. The effect might move or remain still. Such an effect can be destroyed prior to when its duration ends. If the spell affects an area, then the spell stays with that area for its duration.

Creatures become subject to the spell when they enter the area and are no longer subject to it when they leave.

CRB, School(Subschool); Conj subschool Creation wrote:

a creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.

A simple RAW ruling that there is no interaction as fire is not specifically mentioned in fog cloud.

A more complex ruling is that while fire isn't specifically mentioned in fog cloud then it is reasonable to rule that the effect spreads back into the AoE(aka subschool text overcomes duration text). That is not the case with obscuring mist as the interaction is specifically mentioned.

Lastly, a GM could rule that the fire permanently ends the fog cloud AoE in overlapping areas. I think this is the furthest from a core reading but retains simplicity.

[Strife2002]

Azothath wrote:

fog cloud

yes, disperse -> permanently end the spell effect (effectively dispel or counter the spell). There isn't a gradual change unless the GM house rules it. It is assumed that the wind covers the AoE of the fog cloud.

while not specifically mentioned in fog cloud see obscuring mist as most GMs use fire effects to end the fog/mist effect in overlapping areas of effect(AoE). On the caster's turn the fog cloud ongoing spread should fill in the AoE that was eliminated.

Ok I just want to be sure I understand here. Are you saying you think that once a fire or wind effect burns away/disperses an area of fog/mist, the AoE should be refilled on the caster's next turn, assuming there's still some duration remaining?

[Azothath]

sometimes what happens in practice (at the table) is not exactly what you may expect from reading the rules. It is a very complex game based on rules in conversational english. The GM has to interpret the rules at times for a tasteful reasonably consistent ruleset and a game that runs smoothly and enjoyably. That interpretation is going to vary from a central understanding of what all these rules seem to say to most people. Think of it as a gaussian distribution of opinion around a core interpretation within a societal group. It's not a bad thing as it makes the game adaptable to differing tastes and sensibilities.

I think there are reasonable rulings within the grey areas(variance of opinion) that maintain RAW. Sometimes the grey areas are tiny and the rules are consistent. I don't really post about what I think isn't sensible as that's not productive.

[Strife2002]

I mean...yes I know that. I was just looking for an official (or semi-official) clarification or short of that a general consensus among the community to rule in my games. As a GM I could certainly choose to just rule it however I want but I tend to avoid that because I'm not paid to know anything about game balance like they are. I prefer to rule based on the consensus of the developers or forum community. This is just an issue with terminology (if "disperse" means "dispel" also), and I just wanted to try and get an idea of RAI.

[Azothath]

well shoot... scan all the posts with names you recognize for keywords and see if you come up with something.