1
\$\begingroup\$

These 2 questions:

...are currently closed as duplicates of this question:

However, the Superior Technique fighting style (from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and the Martial Adept feat (from the Player's Handbook) are different rules. They are written differently, and they are in different books, and they cover different concepts (one being a fighting style, the other being a feat.

Both game features involve superiority dice, but the questions posed seek clarity with specificity that relies on expert opinion, which should be able to differentiate the two different rules.

And yet questions regarding these two completely different rules have been closed as duplicates. Why are these currently closed as duplicates, and why have they not been reopened?

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ In addition... It looks like your mainsite question was closed as a duplicate by a single user with a [dnd-5e] gold badge. You didn't really make a case in that mainsite question (or the comments below it) for why it's not a duplicate, other than to comment "Clearly not a duplicate" (and nothing else) 15 minutes ago. Why not first reply to the user to ask them why they think it's a duplicate, and/or edit your post (or leave a comment) to specify how your question is distinct? \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ Isn’t the burden of proof on the accuser? \$\endgroup\$
    – Amethyst Wizard
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:03
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I’d recommend reframing to ask if these questions are duplicates. Your current framing assumes bad faith from the close voters. We didn’t close questions maliciously. We closed these questions because we genuinely believe they are duplicates. So that’s why they were closed. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ Okay then maybe the question is more, why are the non duplicates not reopened? \$\endgroup\$
    – Amethyst Wizard
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:07
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @AmethystWizard: This isn't a court of law, and there are no "accusers". It's a collaborative platform; we're all trying to work together to improve the site. If you disagree with the duplicate closure, the first step should probably be to try and resolve the issue there before immediately taking the issue to Meta. (That's not to say the issue might not have ended up here eventually, if you found yourselves unable to convince each other that your question is or is not a duplicate... But Meta shouldn't be the first resort to resolve a disagreement.) \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thomas told me to take it to meta, i tried to convince there and he told me to come here. \$\endgroup\$
    – Amethyst Wizard
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast I did suggest they post a meta discussion after a brief exchange with them in one of the comment sections. It was suggested that they were not duplicates because Superior Technique and Martial Adept had significant differences in wording, which as you can tell from my answer, left me a little confused. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AmethystWizard and Thomas: Fair enough! I didn't see that part of the conversation, since it wasn't below the question that seemed to prompt this meta post. (EDIT: Though it looks like there wasn't really any attempt made to discuss it below that question either... Merely Amethyst's assertion that it's not one, followed by Thomas's response that he thinks it is a duplicate and suggesting that the issue be taken to Meta.) \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:15

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3
\$\begingroup\$

It should be reopened.

As you say, one is a question about a feat, and the other is a question about a class feature. These are two clearly distinct rules items, even if the wording is similar (or even identical), and as such, the two questions are distinct rather than duplicates. As such, the question should be reopened, simply because of that difference alone.

Since questions should be closed if they meet all three of the duplicate criteria, and this question is not an obvious subset of the other question, since class abilities are not subsets of feats, it does not meet the criteria for closure as a duplicate.

\$\endgroup\$
18
  • \$\begingroup\$ We have closed questions about different features that were effectively identical before \$\endgroup\$
    – Exempt-Medic
    Jul 30, 2021 at 11:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Just because they're very similar doesn't mean that they're the same. The fact that one is a class feature while the other one isn't is potentially a big difference in its own right. \$\endgroup\$
    – nick012000
    Jul 30, 2021 at 11:45
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Similar isn’t an accurate assessment. The features in question are indistinguishable in their wording. The only difference is the name of the feature. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 11:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Medix2 Thank you for making me aware of it; I've voted to reopen that one too. \$\endgroup\$
    – nick012000
    Jul 30, 2021 at 11:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Medix2 Those are all questions about spells, not class features or feats. \$\endgroup\$
    – nick012000
    Jul 30, 2021 at 12:33
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ It would significantly improve this answer if you would evaluate the question against the three duplicate criteria, though it may not matter now, since the question has been edited and reopened. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 14:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov Okay, done. \$\endgroup\$
    – nick012000
    Jul 30, 2021 at 15:11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @nick012000 Just saying it doesn’t meet the criteria doesn’t prove anything. To me, it seems abundantly obvious that it meets all three criteria (or did, before it was edited to be a substantively different question). \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 15:15
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov Class abilities are not subsets of feats, thus making one question not a subset of the other. \$\endgroup\$
    – nick012000
    Jul 30, 2021 at 15:16
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah that’s not really is meant by “subset” in the criteria, but oh well. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 15:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ A feat is not a subset of a fighting style. A Fighting style is not a subset of a feat. They have the same text, and that should be noted in the answer, but it is very clearly not a subset. \$\endgroup\$
    – That_Knight_Guy
    Jul 30, 2021 at 15:40
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @That_Knight_Guy Again, that is not at all what "subset" means in the criteria. It is not saying "are the features properly subsets in the context of the game mechanics". It is just asking "does answering one question clearly answer the other?" \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 16:07
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast How many years of closures do we have to reverse then? \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 18:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov: That's always been how it's worked. Closures should never be based on knowing that the answers to the questions are the same; the actual questions should be the same. (It's part of the reason we ended up making a new generic "canonical dupe target" for the many questions about multiclassing known/prepared spells - because a question about spells known/prepared for a paladin/sorcerer isn't necessarily obviously going to be answered in a question about wizard/cleric spells, unless you already know the answer and where in the rules it is.) \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 30, 2021 at 18:33
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast I mean closing questions as dupes of questions about features with the same or similar wording. That's how we've done it since before I came around. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 18:34
-2
\$\begingroup\$

These questions ask the same thing about features with the same wording that do the same thing.

One of these quotes is copied from Superior Technique, and one is copied from Martial Adept, can you discern which is which?

You gain one superiority die, which is a d6 (this die is added to any superiority dice you have from another source). This die is used to fuel your maneuvers. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You regain your expended superiority dice when you finish a short or long rest.

You gain one superiority die, which is a d6 (this die is added to any superiority dice you have from another source). This die is used to fuel your maneuvers. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You regain your expended superiority dice when you finish a short or long rest.

Superior Technique, Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything:

enter image description here

Martial Adept, Player’s Handbook:

enter image description here

All of the linked questions are asking how the two above quotes interact with the level scaling from the Battle Master’s Combat Superiority feature. But since the above quotes are duplicates, the questions are duplicates - they ask the exact same question about the exact same body of text.

Your question has a non-duplicate inside of it.

Your question, Can the superiority die from ‘Superior Technique’ be used for newly learned combat maneuvers?, contains a non-duplicate inside of it, that is, if you take Superior Technique before taking Battle Master at 3rd level, can you use the Superior Technique die on maneuvers learned from Combat Superiority. This is not a dupe, and if you edit your question to ask about that and not the level scaling, we can reopen it. Some details about why you think it might not be the case would be helpful though, as Medix2 points out:

I will say, "Can the superiority die from superior technique be used to perform the newly learned maneuvers?" is probably a new question, though I'm unsure why one would theorize that it might not be able to be used and it may be good to explain why you think that might be the case or what is confusing about the scenario

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @AmethystWizard: As far as I can tell, the quote in Thomas's answer here is identical to the description of Martial Adept as it appears in D&D Beyond's standalone feat listing and DDB's compendium version of the PHB, as well as in current printings of the physical PHB. (It's also identical to the second paragraph of the Superior Technique fighting style from TCoE, which is Thomas's point.) \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:17
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast “if you already have superiority dice you gain one more” is in my printing, but perhsps i have an older printing… seems odd. \$\endgroup\$
    – Amethyst Wizard
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:19
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ ...That said, the answers being the same is not what's relevant in determining whether the questions are duplicates. Relevant meta: If an answer to question A can be found in question B, should we close A as duplicate of B? \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:19
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @AmethystWizard: Yeah, that's what the PHB originally said, but that wording was changed in the very first errata to the PHB (as I note in my answer to the question that yours was closed as a duplicate of). \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 30, 2021 at 5:20
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov indistiguishable wording should never be enough to prevent a question from being asked about a differently named feature. If a person searches for the Superior Technique fighting style, but the only questions available are about the older Martial Adept feat, they may have trouble finding an answer. The answer in the newer questions can link to the prior answer, both to make writing the logic easier, and helping the search algorithm decide that the older answer is relevant. \$\endgroup\$
    – That_Knight_Guy
    Jul 30, 2021 at 14:41
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @That_Knight_Guy We do not delete duplicates for exactly this reason. Searching "superior technique" on main yields the three questions we are discussing here as the first three results. There are no search related issues associated with these duplicate closures. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 14:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov Not everyone who searches post questions. There is no guarantee that a given question will be asked, and if it never asked it won't appear. The questions are at this point linked, so they would naturally show up in the search. Try searching for similar questions that haven't been linked. The search algorithm will have much more trouble determining that they are relevant. \$\endgroup\$
    – That_Knight_Guy
    Jul 30, 2021 at 14:50
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @That_Knight_Guy We have abundant precedent for even similar wording to be enough to close as a dupe. It is indisputable that the common practice on the site is to close questions asking about features that are sufficiently similar to other features that already have questions. I get that you think we shouldn't close such questions, but we have been doing so for years. \$\endgroup\$
    – Thomas Markov
    Jul 30, 2021 at 16:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .