I recently created a Q&A (Can I trigger an Opportunity Attack by forcing an opponent to move out of my reach?) for the purposes of having a general question to dupe questions dealing with forced movement causing OAs to.

I subsequently went through and closed 6 questions as duplicates of it (5 old, 1 current) and added it to 3 questions that were already closed as duplicates.

I'm not sure if it would have been more proper to post this to meta before I did this (in retrospect the answer is clearly "yes"), but given that one user has disagreed with one of my choices I figured I'd post what I did here to make sure everything is kosher and agreed upon.

Questions I marked as duplicates:

The last one has already been reversed because another user disagreed with it. I still think it is a duplicate, but I can see why it might not be considered that as well.

There were other questions dealing with the topic that were outside the scope of my general question so I let them be of course.

Anyways, I guess I am posting this as more of a record of what I did and so people can clearly go through and debate/reverse any of the things I did.

Please let me know if there is any disagreement about anything I have marked.

I'll accept my lumps as well if what I did was out of line.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ We tried this with surprise (deleted Q&A. 10k+ only), but it didn't go over well. \$\endgroup\$
    – daze413
    Commented Apr 23, 2018 at 14:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ @daze413: oh interesting. Well it certainly is not a huge deal if this is decided to be a similar case. Though I will say that the case of forced movement and OAs has the advantage of having a single very clear and broadly applicable rule that doesn't have any known modifications or exceptions. So, hopefully that means its scope is narrow enough. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 23, 2018 at 14:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ similar in that we tried to make a canonical question and answer, but there was no closing as duplicate involve during that time. The question got put on hold. \$\endgroup\$
    – daze413
    Commented Apr 23, 2018 at 14:19

1 Answer 1


So... have you ever seen even a diamond mod suddenly go close that many questions?

That’s a tip you should probably post before going on a mass rampage of this sort. Heck, people post before making half as many tag changes.

I don’t have the time to go root through them all on a Saturday night, but yeah, post before making mass changes in the future.

Time passes...

OK after review I think this is working fine. The slightly different questions remain as signposts, but there's no sense having a rush to get free rep with the first "no" to every iteration of the question. The infestation one was slightly different as it begged the question of whether the movement was indeed "forced" in the same way, so fair enough.

This is a lot more tightly scoped than the earlier "canonical surprise" question, which was more "here's an essay on surprise, link everything about surprise here." That's too broad. I think "forced movement and OAs" is pretty tightly scoped though. A dozen questions about a one line rule (mostly obviously resulting from just not having found that specific clause) is different from a dozen questions about an entire page-long rules subsystem.

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, my apologies. In the future I will for sure. At least I think/hope that no permanent harm/disruption will come of it. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 22, 2018 at 3:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Cool. I've been considering doing the same with the "there's a problem player in my group" problems, they are mostly all the same and I think a canonical dupe would help them ask actual interesting unique questions. \$\endgroup\$
    – mxyzplk
    Commented Apr 25, 2018 at 1:38

You must log in to answer this question.

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