This question, Rogue Holding Bonus Action to disengage once attacked, is an obvious duplicate of this question: Can you ready a bonus action?. At least, the general question being asked is exactly the same - can you ready a bonus action? However, the context in which this recent question is asking about readying bonus actions shows evidence of a fundamental misunderstanding of what those particular actions actually do. That is, the problem here is that if we had just closed this question as a duplicate without answering, they are led to an answer to their question about readying bonus actions, but are left with a misunderstanding of how the other things mentioned in the question work.
For this particular question I chose to write an answer instead of voting to close, linking the question it was a duplicate of and spending most of the answer discussing the confused assumptions the question made; my thinking is that maybe the misunderstanding about other things made for the compelling reason Doppel talks about in her third criterion:
- There isn't a strong, compelling reason to cover Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met, this rarely happens.)
I also don't think "close the question and correct the confusion in a comment" work for this particular question, based on (again) Doppelgreener's guidance here:
If you're substantially solving their problem by correcting them, then post an answer and include the corrections as part of that answer. (Make sure you answer the question independently. Answers that solve just a little part of the problem don't get well received.)
But I'm not sure, hence asking here for guidance. How should we approach questions like this, where the general premise is obviously a duplicate, but the specific context presents significant confusion or incorrect assumptions that the asker would be well-served by having explained?
It should be noted that this meta discussion is highly related to two previous meta discussions, which motivated in part my decision to answer:
- A question has some facts majorly wrong: should I be correcting them in comments or an answer? (linked and quoted above)
- How do we handle it when the asker's problem is just that they're confused?
Neither of these questions really address the scenario where a duplicate is involved, so I think further discussion here is warranted.