10
\$\begingroup\$

I think Does a Life Cleric casting Goodberry at higher spell levels get more potent Berries? should be reopened.

I have a generic concern with the closure in that it does not seem helpful to mark something as a duplicate of multiple completely different answers. Asking the user to search through and then provide the context and logical framework that would allow them to answer their question using multiple answers doesn't seem to follow the SE ethos described in this meta answer:

The purpose of the SE format is to answer readers' questions efficiently and easily, without their having to wade through noise to get at the signal; Saying "The answer is somewhere on this other page about a different topic" is not conducive to that.


You can see this play out in this specific question which I think bypassed some of the nuance and logic that OP needed and that was lacking from the other two answers. OP clearly was still confused and expressed what seemed to be valid differentiating factors.

For example, the fact that a spell does not need a "if cast at a higher level" language to be cast at a higher level is not said in either of the linked duplicates. This clearly that was a big stumbling block for OP and would have been something that would have to be included in an answer to the closed question.

In short, I do not think the linked questions fully and unambiguously answer the original question and that it would be good to open it again.

Can we open this one back up? Or am I completely off base here?

\$\endgroup\$
11
\$\begingroup\$

Should be reopened.

The question is distinct from the questions currently linked as a duplicate. It was my understanding that the policy here is that the question needs to be identical for it to be a duplicate.

While the answers in the "duplicate" questions do answer this one, the question itself IS different. The other questions do not address the specific question of upcasting.

We wouldn't mark this as a duplicate of another "does upcasting X do more if the spell doesn't state that it does", so we shouldn't mark this as a duplicate just because another answer is relevant to this one.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I'm also concerned that people trying to understand the answer to this question would need some decent system mastery before they can fuse the two linked posts into an answer. We do our best when we join the dots for readers rather than leaving figuring out the solution as an exercise to the reader, which means it's fine to give a specific answer to this question. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Jan 23 '18 at 19:06
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ And that goes back to duplicate questions are not ones which have the same answer, but have only the same question. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jan 23 '18 at 19:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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