See the two following questions:

These two questions fundamentally ask the same thing: "What's the math behind converting a monster's save to a player's roll?" (In D&D 5e)

I wonder if they're properly duplicates? If they are, which is the "better" question to let stand as the canonical reference? And would it make sense to migrate the answers to all live together?

I'm torn. On one hand, mathematically the questions are really identical.

On the other hand, reading the answer to one as a response to the other question would be... jarring, to say the least.

Just slap a "related, near-duplicate" link on each?



One asks how to implement a mechanic, and the other asks if an implementation is correct. Thus, they concern the same mechanic, but the context to the questions is different.

As you mentioned, reading the answer of one in regards to the other is jarring -- I think that's argument enough.

A 'related' link seems appropriate in this case.


You must log in to answer this question.

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