## How to make a Google Play app with paid and free-with-in-app-purchasing versions?

I want to implement an IAP system as well as a fully paid one in my game.

There are about 8 levels in my game. I want the paid version to cost around \$ 4 and in case of IAP, each level can be unlocked for 0.99 cents.

Do I have to create two separate apps (one for paid and one for IAP) or can I have both of these in a single app? The user can then decide if they want to buy the entire game or unlock a few levels using the IAP feature.

## In 5e, are there two versions of a ‘shove’, and if so, what further effects do the different versions possibly allow?

As I see it there are two versions of ‘shoving’ in 5e: a physical verion and a magical version.

The physical version allows pushing an opponent backwards OR knocking them prone, while the magic version moves them towards you or away from you but does not mention possibly knocking them prone.

The physical version is described on p. 195 (PHB) as follows,

"Using the Attack action, you can make a Special melee Attack to shove a creature, either to knock it prone or push it away from you. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this Attack replaces one of them. The target must be no more than one size larger than you and must be within your reach. Instead of Making an Attack roll, you make a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target’s Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you win the contest, you either knock the target prone or push it 5 feet away from you."

The Shield Master feat (p.170 of PHB) allows for this physical version as well.

The Telekinetic feat in Tashas C. of E. (p.81) is described this way,

"As a bonus action, you can try to telekinetically shove one creature you can see within 30 feet of you. When you do so, the target must succeed on a Strength saving throw (DC 8 + your proficiency bonus + the ability modifier of the score increased by this feat) or be moved 5 feet toward or away from you. A creature can willingly fail this save.

Certain spells and other magical abilities, such as thorn whip and the eldritch invocation Grasp of Hadar, move opponents closer to, or farther from the caster, but do not mention the possibility of knocking the opponent prone.

I can imagine a reasonable explanation for why/how there are two versions: the physical is a crashing, concussive impact, while the magical is perhaps more like a tractor beam or magnetic attraction or repulsion and–possibly–not as abrupt.

But if there are two versions, does that lead to further issues?

Perhaps it’s a separate question, but I ask here to highlight why/how answers to my initial question might matter:

Is the telekinetic (magic) version of a shove something that could reasonably be a surprise to an opponent–would/should that give some disadvantage on the opponent’s chance to resist being shoved?

If an opponent were magically shoved from behind, when they didn’t think anyone was there, would that be a reasonable basis for giving advantage to anyone attacking them from the front?

I’d appreciate any thoughtful input on this–whether directly answering the initial question or just focusing on other aspects. I want to understand how ‘shove’ can be used and haven’t seen much online that explores the topic. Of course each DM could rule as they see fit, and talking about this ahead of time to flesh out some aspects of the spell would be wise (I just emailed my DM to do so), but I’m glad for any input here, as well.

## Do different versions of the same feats stack in 5th edition? [duplicate]

The reason I ask this is because there are several different versions of the spell sniper feet, and all of them double range for ranged spells with attack rolls. Most feats that are like this specify they don’t, but not spell sniper. I’m not asking how you’d rule it, I’m asking if the base rules allow it. I can’t find anything on this. I’m hopeful because this would mean that a sorcerer + warlock could eventually have a range of 9600 feet with eldrich blast.

## Run beta versions of sites SEO safely [duplicate]

We have domain.com and want to test a new site template on beta.domain.com.

What is the correct way to run a beta test without affecting SEO of the main domain.com?

In the topic SEO safe way to run beta of new site on seperate domain I found 2 recommendations:

1. Putting a robots.txt with noindex to our beta.domain.com
2. Canonicalizing beta.domain.com to domain.com – Why? In any case we already have the noindex flag…

Does it still actual in 2020? Do you have any other recommendations?

By the way, do we need to register beta.domain.com in Google Webmasters Tools?

## What are some good feats for sorcerer’s from current or any other previous versions of Dnd? [closed]

I am playing a shadar kai, Giant Soul(strom) sorcerer(level 06).
I took the crossbrow experties feat at level 1.
I have +4 mod on both Dex and Cha, and a +3 mod on Con. (I have +6 bonus on Con saves).
With haste, shield, absorb element and shadar kai’s necrotic damage resistance I fight in melee.

My my usual attack pattern is-
1.Go in mele use shocking grasp
2.haste atk-use a hand crossbow
3.bonus action-another hand crossbow atk(Through crossbow experties feat)

Why min-maxing? Because eveeryone in the party does. If I don’t I will feel useless in combat. The DM has allwed a lot of previous version material to the other players.

I have already thought of war caster, but with the defence I have conscentration is not a big problem. Also, if shocking grasp hits I can back off without provoking opportunity attack and have the 60′ movement due to haste.

With this build of mine what would be the best feat for me(any verion/any book)?

## Does the Sneak Attack class feature of the Generic Classes stack with the improved and greater versions of it?

Generic Classes have the possibility to gain different class features in exchange of a bonus feat:

For the purposes of these classes, the following class features can be selected in place of bonus feats (unless noted, each may only be selected once).

The Sneak Attack class features that can be selected are:

Sneak Attack (Ex)

As the rogue ability, but +2d6 on damage rolls. Prerequisites: Hide 4 ranks, Move Silently 4 ranks.

Improved Sneak Attack (Ex)

Add +3d6 to your sneak attack damage. Prerequisites: Hide 11 ranks, Move Silently 11 ranks, sneak attack.

Greater Sneak Attack (Ex)

Add +4d6 to your sneak attack damage. Prerequisites: Hide 18 ranks, Move Silently 18 ranks, sneak attack, improved sneak attack.

Do these three class features stack together?

## Why does PHP’s strtotime() not understand a Unix timestamp? Or: Why don’t programming languages support “versions” of themselves? [closed]

Yes, I know that strtotime returns a Unix timestamp from a "time string". However, there are numerous situations where I’ve fed a semi-unknown "time string" into it and been baffled when I got a bool(false) returned instead of it just returning the same integer back:

$$current_timestamp = time(); var_dump(strtotime($$current_timestamp));

Output:

bool(false)

I have long since made a wrapper function to strtotime, as I have done with every single PHP function I use, which handles this for it, so it’s not a practical problem for me anymore. However, it’s very interesting to me how this kind of situation can happen.

Why do such smart people (no, this is not sarcasm), who are able to create a highly advanced and complex programming language, which I could never do myself even if I got 50 years of "paused time" from now to do it, just seem to "overlook" many such basic "details"?

Is this another case of "we knew about it early on, and agree that it was not right, but people had begun expecting this bad behaviour from the function, and then we couldn’t change it, and as time went by, it became less and less possible"?

I’m very torn about things like this. This particular thing I find idiotic, but there is a good point against changing things around. Just look at the nightmare that is Python. I wouldn’t want to have to constantly try to re-read the manual for every single PHP function I use, wondering if PHP 8.1 or something has changed the parameter order around or something evil like that. If I have to choose between that or fix things myself, I choose the latter.

I just wish that language authors, and in particular PHP since it’s what I use, would just introduce some kind of "legacy mode" where the old/original versions of functions are kept around in the "engine", but only activated unless the user does <?php8 for their scripts, or something like that. Or maybe set a configuration option, to make the source code files less ugly. That seems like a perfect compromise to me. Why is that not actually done?

Remote APIs, such as Stripe (payment-related), frequently have "versions" where old ones are supported for ages/ever, so why can’t local programming language engines also do that?

Had few chrome vulnerabilities [CVE-2020-6420] detected by BI(Retina). Upgraded the affected machines to chrome version 84.0.4147.89. After re-scan still the same vulnerabilities are detected.

## StartTLS encryption – which TLS versions are supported?

I am looking to set a third party application to authenticate with our domain. The application supports LDAPv3 and we have opted to use the start StartTLS extension to encrypt the credentials from the source host application towards the domain server.

Having said this, I am at a loss as to what TLS version is used in StartTLS. Given the older versions are less acceptable, we would like to opt to allow only the later version (1.2, 1.3) of TLS be accepted.

My question therefore is;

What TLS version is used/supported for StartTLS?

## Differences between Mathematica versions 11 and 12 regarding ODE solution

Solving the ODE

$$(\lambda +y(x)) y”(x)-y'(x)^2-1=0$$

with Version 11 I got the solution

yx = 1/2 (Exp[-Exp[C[1]] (C[2] + x) - 2 C[1]] + Exp[Exp[C[1]] (C[2] + x)] - 2 lambda)

while in Version 12 for the same ODE I got the solution

yx = -lambda - Tanh[E^C[1] (x + C[2])]^2/Sqrt[-E^(2 C[1]) Sech[E^C[1] (x + C[2])]^2 Tanh[E^C[1] (x + C[2])]^2]

This last result isn’t ever real: see the denominator. My question is regarding how to ask the solver in Version 12 to obtain the Version 11 answer. Thanks.