D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Archer changes

[Al]

You've got a class lying around that allows for a 4 point increase in Dexterity like the Barbarian allows for a 4 point increase in Strength? (More if you are a Frenzied berserker or high level Barbarian).

I think that consistently assuming that the barbarian has four points higher Str is probably slightly misleading. Since your meleeist is primarily going to be taking levels of fighter, and you imply that the fighter will likely only take around three levels of barbarian, it is slightly disingenuous to constantly assume that he is going to be raging. Nevertheless, you still cannot rebut that the archer is going to have a significantly higher Dex, by around 8-12 points by top level than the meleeist.

Yes, they are, but the archer is much more dependent upon smaller amounts of damage per hit, making these protections more effective against his attacks.

That's also distinctly arguable. The Tempest which you seem to be so fond of is entirely dependent on lots of little hits. Within 30', a 12th level archer wielding +4 bow, +4 arrow, mighty 18 with Point-Blank Shot, Bracers of Archery and Weapon Specialisation is going to be dealing d8+16, irrespective of elemental damage and sneak attack. The fighter with strength 26 (since in most encounters he will *not* be raging, given he only gets one or two per day), a +4 2h weapon and Weapon Spec is dealing 2d6+18. That's only about a 20% difference in damage per hit, which is hardly a huge amount, especially given that the archer is getting more attacks and better to-hit bonuses.

Actually, you did. When I pointed out that a wiazrd was likely to win in a ranged duel against an archer, you proudly proclaimed to inherent superiority of the archer in this regard. A claim that just doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

Something of a misrepresentation I feel. I claimed that against a wizard, the archer stands a better chance than the meleeist. Against a relatively poor or even mediocrely prepared wizard, the archer stands a reasonable chance to kill him; the meleeist has a very poor chance unless he uses Power Critical (which, again, is only once per day). On balance, therefore, the archer fares better than the meleeist against wizards. This does not mean that the archer will always win- it merely means he is more likely to win than a meleeist.

Given that most of the wizard's defenses are precast spells, that is a dubious assumption.

Precasting can be over-rated, particularly at the higher levels, and particularly against NPCs. In most adventures, the PCs are the protagonists (i.e. attacking). Given the proliferation of strategic spells (vis-a-vis tactical spells) such as teleport and scrying by the mid- to high-levels, a party of PCs can strike at enemy wizards who are not that well-prepared. In this situation, the wizard does have to erect defenses, but if the archer can kill him before he has the chance, that's a huge benefit. In dungeons, as well, many NPCs will not be that well-prepared. Indeed, though this is a case of campaign style, I would argue that more often than not defending NPCs are not well-prepared for a well-planned PC attack. Of course, if the NPCs are attacking, they may well have defenses ready, but in this scenario, the meleeist is equally, if not more useless than the archer.

Comparing the average damage for the meleeist with the higher than average damage of the archer (as you do here) is poor form.

Actually, having looked at the numbers, I gave an *underestimate* for the archer's damage. The archer inflicts d8+8(magic)+4(str)+2d6(elemental)+2d6(holy)=30.5 damage per hit. Neither did I assume all four attacks hit. Three attacks hitting does over ninety points of damage, so I even adjusted this slightly downwards (to 2 and 2/3 attacks hitting). Given that the archer has around +6 to hit over the meleeist (+4 magic, +2 bracers), even his third attack with rapid shot is only at one point less than the fighter's primary.

Assuming each attack hits. And you roll close to maximum damage on each attack. Highly dubious assumptions on both counts

Not at all. Average damage per hit: d8+8(magic)+4(str)+2(WS)+1(PBS)+1(bracers)+4d6(sneak)+4d6(elements, holy)=49.5 damage/hit. Given that point-blank shot to-hit bonus has kicked in, the tertiary attack of the archer will be at least on a par with the meleeist's primary. With Zen Archery, the archer's *fourth* attack is roughly on par with the meleeist's primary. I assume that between three and four attacks hit, for roughly 180 damage. Given that with Zen Archery the meleeist's primary attack is at a bonus between the archer's third and fourth attacks, and given that you assume he hits, this assumption is probably reasonable.

I doubt it. A good chunk of your damage is sneak attack based. Barbarians have uncanny dodge

Yep, sorry about that. I was just demonstrating the amount of damage that the archer could dish out. Remove barbarians from the list. Every other class taking 180 damage, or the rogue taking 125 damage, will go down. The barbarian, alone of the eleven classes, may survive a barrage.

Further, your weapon is a +5 equivalent weapon (+1 base, +1 elemental, +1 elemental, +2 holy), how many 12th level characters are running around with 50,000 gp weapons

Much more efficient are two +3 weapons. These only cost 36,000. That's the great thing about bow/arrow stacking.

You are assuming that your 12th level character has a 26-27 Dexterity

Of course! Since you made your meleeist a half-orc with base 20 Str, I'm making my archer an elf with base 20 Dex. Add three for ability increases, buy the nice wizard a Pearl of Power II and ask him to cast Cat's Grace (average +3.5 pts). Total: 26.5 Dex.

Since you are already assuming a 50,000 gp bow, you are assuming the character has 86,000 gp worth of items, plus another 5,100 for the Bracers. How many 12th level characters have 91,000 gp worth of items, much less 91,000 gp worth of items locked up in three items

No. I gave him 36,000gp for weapons, using the bow/arrow stacking manoeuvre (above). He bought the wizard a Pearl of Power for his Dex buffs, weighing in at 4,000; and did indeed buy his Bracers of Archery at 5,100. Of a total wealth of 88,000, he's spent roughly half (45,100), plenty enough left over for a +3 cloak of resistance (9,000), a +2 ring of protection (8,000), a +2 amulet of natural armour (8,000), another Pearl of Power II so the wizard will also cast Bull's Strength (4,000), a +2 mithril shirt (5,000), a +2 mithril buckler (5,000), a melee weapon (2,000) and some potions (2,000). Now break down the meleeist's spending.

Besides, you vastly underestimate the AC of the meleeist in this case

Now let's break down *your* spending. The +1 mithril full plate of nimbleness sets you back 19,000 (I don't have MaOF but think nimbleness adds +2 for cost), the Gloves of Dex 16,000 (though I'll be generous and assume you go the Pearl of Power route for 4,000). Your prized Girdle of Giant Strength is most efficient with a Pearl of Power IV/empowered BS (16,000). Your amulet and ring will set you back 36,000 between them leaving you with 10,000, limiting you to a single elemental weapon, and no heavy fortification (incidentally, the +1 heavy fortification nimbleness armour is a +8 armour effectively, so with the base cost of mithril full plate this alone takes out 75,000).

You miss the point: those are melee PrCs that are better than the Weapon Master.

Perhaps, but your meleeist always seems to be using a falchion or greatsword. Neither the Tempest nor the Master of Chains is a PrC for a falchion or greatsword wielder. The Weapon Master, by contrast, is.

To some extent, why not? Most melee specialists can switch between melee combat arms with minimal effort, a much less viable route for the bowman to take

Unless he has Quick Draw, auto-switching melee weapons is not viable. Moreover, the tempest/master of chains is unlikely to invest in a decent Greatsword (and will therefore not be able to sunder due to it being of lower + value than the bow) and will certainly be second rate with it- the Tempest may well go for the Finesse route, and the Master of Chains, even if he goes for Strength, will not have any feats soaked into the greatsword or falchion.

Sure we can, which is one of the reasons why archers are vulnerable: they are easy to neutralize with simple spells.

My point was this: the meleeist is just as easy to neutralise with spells. Grease, Entangle, Web, Fire Shield, Wall of Fire, Repulsion etc. can make life extremely troublesome for the meleeist without hurting the archer significantly (though Entangle and Web would cause some problems).

Most mid to high level opponents should have magical resources

First twenty creatures in the MM of CRs 6-15: aboleth (possibly due to enslavement), animated object (no), elder arrowhawk (no), athach (no), behir (no), beholder (yes), belker (no), bodak (no), bulette (no), four celestials (yes), chaos beast(no), chimera (no), chuul (no), couatl (yes), delver (no), succubus (yes), bebilith (probably not). About six or seven out of twenty- hardly a majority.

Personally, I think that bandying around theory can go on for ever. Far more useful is to go for worked examples. I'll build a 12th level archer, you build a 12th level meleeist- be sensible, this isn't an exercise in min/maxing.

Ground Rules:
Core Rules and WotC splatbooks (no S&S, no FRCS, no OA etc.)
30-point buy
12th level

I'll build mine a bit later- hope to hear from you soon.

 

[Pax]

I think that consistently assuming that the barbarian has four points higher Str is probably slightly misleading.

Um, you DO realise the Barbarian has an innate ability to add an (unnamed) bonus to strength, several times per day?

The ability, by the way, is called "rage" ...

And in a one-off encounter, yes, a Rage is pretty well assured.

Also note, a PURE Barbarian is still a melee warrior!.

That's also distinctly arguable. The Tempest which you seem to be so fond of is entirely dependent on lots of little hits.

Doublesword +5/+5, Weapon Specialisation: Doublesword, and a Strength of what, start with a 15, add 3 for level increases through 12th level, add 6 for a Belt of Giant Strength ... 24?

1d8+14 per hit. Every bit as much as an archer with a +5 longbow (mighty, +4) and +5 arrows can manage, in general. *shrug*

Within 30', a 12th level archer wielding +4 bow, +4 arrow, mighty 18 with Point-Blank Shot, Bracers of Archery and Weapon Specialisation is going to be dealing d8+16, irrespective of elemental damage and sneak attack.

And within SIXTY feet, the Tempest simply decides to charge-and-sunder -- remember, in a charge, you can move up to double your movement rate.

Eighty feet if the Tempest picked up a levelof Barbarian.

One hundred and sixty feet with a movement-buff (boots of striding and springing, expeditious retreat, whatever).

The fighter with strength 26 (since in most encounters he will *not* be raging, given he only gets one or two per day), a +4 2h weapon and Weapon Spec is dealing 2d6+18. That's only about a 20% difference in damage per hit, which is hardly a huge amount, especially given that the archer is getting more attacks and better to-hit bonuses.[/b]

... yep, the archer gets more attacks, all right ... right up until that charge-and-sunder, from beyond 30' (even for a nonbarbarian halfling in less than heavy armor!).

Something of a misrepresentation I feel. I claimed that against a wizard, the archer stands a better chance than the meleeist.

The melee warrior uses cover to close to the wizard, who now has to cast defensively or suffer AoOs -- not to mention having to more-carefully place area spells so as not to suffer their effects, himself.

Precasting can be over-rated, particularly at the higher levels, and particularly against NPCs. In most adventures, the PCs are the protagonists (i.e. attacking). Given the proliferation of strategic spells (vis-a-vis tactical spells) such as teleport and scrying by the mid- to high-levels, a party of PCs can strike at enemy wizards who are not that well-prepared.

What, the wizard doesn't protect his bedroom with a Dimensional Lock spell?

The wizard doesn't have a Contingency or Chain Contingency going, with their most-needed spell(s) ready to go off with a quick phrase (say, a short line of an elven ballad, translated into orkish, and then recited backwards), a.k.a. a free action ... ?

In this situation, the wizard does have to erect defenses, but if the archer can kill him before he has the chance, that's a huge benefit.

Any wizard who leaves his private "turf" unprotected, deserves to die. Andany wizard who does not provide for his protection while WITHIN that "turf", also deserves to die.

Wizards that stupid don't deserve to live, after all.

In dungeons, as well, many NPCs will not be that well-prepared. Indeed, though this is a case of campaign style, I would argue that more often than not defending NPCs are not well-prepared for a well-planned PC attack. Of course, if the NPCs are attacking, they may well have defenses ready, but in this scenario, the meleeist is equally, if not more useless than the archer.

My rule of thumb is, if the spell would last for 12 or more hours, it was cast prior to the encounter. And spellcasters all tend to plant their near-permanent (and true permanent) spells on their homes ... as one of the first things they DO.

Attacking a cleric in his temple, in the middleof the dungeons? Well, if said cleric did NOT cast an Unhallow sometime within the past year, he deserves a grisly death, and the GM deserves a session with Helga and the Stick of Stupidity.

Yep, sorry about that. I was just demonstrating the amount of damage that the archer could dish out. Remove barbarians from the list. Every other class taking 180 damage, or the rogue taking 125 damage, will go down. The barbarian, alone of the eleven classes, may survive a barrage.

Wizard with (permanent) Reverse Arrows: the archer goes *poof* instead.

Perhaps, but your meleeist always seems to be using a falchion or greatsword. Neither the Tempest nor the Master of Chains is a PrC for a falchion or greatsword wielder. The Weapon Master, by contrast, is.

Monkey Grip, dual-falchion Tempest of Doom. Two Keen falchions, and the Improved Critical feat, and your threat range is 12-20.

Unless he has Quick Draw, auto-switching melee weapons is not viable.

Gloves of storing ...

 

[Storm Raven]

Something of a misrepresentation I feel. I claimed that against a wizard, the archer stands a better chance than the meleeist. Against a relatively poor or even mediocrely prepared wizard, the archer stands a reasonable chance to kill him; the meleeist has a very poor chance unless he uses Power Critical (which, again, is only once per day).

Or Power Lunge and appropriate equipment.

Precasting can be over-rated, particularly at the higher levels, and particularly against NPCs. In most adventures, the PCs are the protagonists (i.e. attacking). Given the proliferation of strategic spells (vis-a-vis tactical spells) such as teleport and scrying by the mid- to high-levels, a party of PCs can strike at enemy wizards who are not that well-prepared. In this situation, the wizard does have to erect defenses, but if the archer can kill him before he has the chance, that's a huge benefit. In dungeons, as well, many NPCs will not be that well-prepared. Indeed, though this is a case of campaign style, I would argue that more often than not defending NPCs are not well-prepared for a well-planned PC attack. Of course, if the NPCs are attacking, they may well have defenses ready, but in this scenario, the meleeist is equally, if not more useless than the archer.

You have wizards that don't have a raft of defensive and other long term spells that they reflexively cast every day and renew regularly? Odd.

Yep, sorry about that. I was just demonstrating the amount of damage that the archer could dish out. Remove barbarians from the list. Every other class taking 180 damage, or the rogue taking 125 damage, will go down. The barbarian, alone of the eleven classes, may survive a barrage.

And rogues, and anyone who takes a couple levels of rogue or barbarian, and anyone who gets armor of fortification. Or one of the many PrCs that grant uncanny dodge.

Now let's break down *your* spending. The +1 mithril full plate of nimbleness sets you back 19,000 (I don't have MaOF but think nimbleness adds +2 for cost),

Wrong, Nimbleness adds +1 to cost.

the Gloves of Dex 16,000 (though I'll be generous and assume you go the Pearl of Power route for 4,000). Your prized Girdle of Giant Strength is most efficient with a Pearl of Power IV/empowered BS (16,000). Your amulet and ring will set you back 36,000 between them leaving you with 10,000, limiting you to a single elemental weapon, and no heavy fortification (incidentally, the +1 heavy fortification nimbleness armour is a +8 armour effectively, so with the base cost of mithril full plate this alone takes out 75,000).

Sorry, using medium fortification is much more cost effective, it is a +3 bonus for a 75% chance of negating sneak attacks or critical hits. The total armor bonus I used was +5, a total cost of 25,000 gp plus the mithral nature of the armor. Still less than your bow and arrows.

Perhaps, but your meleeist always seems to be using a falchion or greatsword. Neither the Tempest nor the Master of Chains is a PrC for a falchion or greatsword wielder. The Weapon Master, by contrast, is.

Try the Frenzied Berserker, or the Singh Rager, or any number of other options. The tempest and Master of Chains are alternate melee styles, more effective than the Weapon Master (a particular PrC which is usually less effective than a straight fighter/barbarian). Unlike arhcers, melee combatants come in a variety of types and styles.

Unless he has Quick Draw, auto-switching melee weapons is not viable. Moreover, the tempest/master of chains is unlikely to invest in a decent Greatsword (and will therefore not be able to sunder due to it being of lower + value than the bow) and will certainly be second rate with it- the Tempest may well go for the Finesse route, and the Master of Chains, even if he goes for Strength, will not have any feats soaked into the greatsword or falchion.

It doesn't matter. The weapons used by the Tempest and Master of Chains are equally good for sundering or disarming a bow (note that under the DMG errata, a bludgeoning weapon, like a spiked chain, can be used to sunder). Heck, the chain gets a bonus to disarm.

First twenty creatures in the MM of CRs 6-15: aboleth (possibly due to enslavement), animated object (no), elder arrowhawk (no), athach (no), behir (no), beholder (yes), belker (no), bodak (no), bulette (no), four celestials (yes), chaos beast(no), chimera (no), chuul (no), couatl (yes), delver (no), succubus (yes), bebilith (probably not). About six or seven out of twenty- hardly a majority.

Poor selection process. Most high CR opponents are going to be classed individuals, frequently powerful undead, humanoids or other individuals with possible access to magical powers. Simply reading through and saying "chaos beasts don't have magic" denies the typical opponents that PCs will face: intelligent, organized adversaries.

Ground Rules:
Core Rules and WotC splatbooks (no S&S, no FRCS, no OA etc.)
30-point buy
12th level

Sure, give me some time.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The Tempest which you seem to be so fond of is entirely dependent on lots of little hits.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Doublesword +5/+5...

A Tempest with a double weapon? Bit of a waste of a Prestige Class, giving up all its primary abilities, wouldn't you say?

The weapons used by the Tempest and Master of Chains are equally good for sundering or disarming a bow (note that under the DMG errata, a bludgeoning weapon, like a spiked chain, can be used to sunder).

A bludgeoning weapon, like a spiked chain, rapier, halfspear, or heavy pick, you mean?

-Hyp.

 

[Pax]

As for the double-weapon restriction on Tempests: I'd never played a TEmpest, so I didn't realise that limitation was there.

And I have to say, thatis SOOOOOOOOO stupid. As dumb as the same restriction on Rangers (so much for the archetypal "staff-wielding wood-wise old fighter" ...).

And as for the spiked chain: limiting it to piercing ONLY is another problem the PHB has; it shouldn't be. An unspiked chain would do comparable damage, after all.

And I can see a spiked chain being built -- and used -- to deal SLASHING damage, too. Think chainsaw.

8P

 

[Al]

Um, you DO realise the Barbarian has an innate ability to add an (unnamed) bonus to strength, several times per day?

Storm Raven has been talking about a fighter with three levels of barbarian as his stock meleeist. This means that he can rage *1* time per day. One =/= several. Nor is it right to assume that this one time lasts all day.

Doublesword +5/+5, Weapon Specialisation: Doublesword, and a Strength of what, start with a 15, add 3 for level increases through 12th level, add 6 for a Belt of Giant Strength ... 24?

Ignoring the fact that the tempest cannot use his advantages with a double weapon, doubleswords (surely two-bladed swords?) don't add 1.5x Str bonus. They work as per normal two-weapon fighting- adding Str bonus for one hand and Str bonus/2 for the other, so d8+14 for one half and d8+10 for the other. That's ignoring the fact that the 12th level fighter cannot afford a double-bladed +5 weapon (let alone a +6 Belt as well) and further ignoring the fact that GMW only does +4 at this point.

1d8+14 per hit. Every bit as much as an archer with a +5 longbow (mighty, +4) and +5 arrows can manage, in general. *shrug*

Ignoring the fact that for bows and arrows, stacking elemental damage is a far more efficient method of boosting damage. This also ignores Weapon Specialisation, PBS, sneak attack, Bracers of Archery etc. within 30'.

And within SIXTY feet, the Tempest simply decides to charge-and-sunder -- remember, in a charge, you can move up to double your movement rate.

We've discussed sunder ad nauseam, and I readily conceded that in a one-on-one, if the archer loses initiative and the meleeist is within charge range, the meleeist will probably win.

The melee warrior uses cover to close to the wizard, who now has to cast defensively or suffer AoOs

What- whilst the wizard does absolutely nothing? The wizard can fly over the cover and rain down death, or go for aerial blast spells (ie. detonate fireball just over fighter's head), buff himself, summon monsters, ready defenses, disintegrate the cover, cast burst spells behind the fighter (confusion?) etc. etc.

What, the wizard doesn't protect his bedroom with a Dimensional Lock spell?

Yep. The 12th level wizard probably doesn't.

The wizard doesn't have a Contingency or Chain Contingency going

Ignoring the fact that the 12th level wiz can't cast Chain Contingency, and may not get a free action.

As I have said before over and over, a well-prepared wizard is basically invincible at high levels. But the archer still stands a much better chance than the meleeist, even if the meleeist is standing behind a tower shield pretending the wizard can't do anything.

My rule of thumb is, if the spell would last for 12 or more hours, it was cast prior to the encounter

Reasonable enough. Protection from Elements, Stoneskin, Obscuring Mist and all the other anti-archer type spells mentioned aren't going to help in this respect. The stat-boosting spells I have already accounted for (by e.g. giving the wiz 18 Con).

Monkey Grip, dual-falchion Tempest of Doom

You are kidding, right? Taking a -4 penalty on both hands really isn't worthwhile. Going for two shortswords and Power Attacking four points is better by 2.5 points per hit (and with a tempest, that's a lot of hits) for equivalent amounts of penalty. Given that Weapon Finesse is a tempest prereq, using almost anything other than two shortswords (to optimise on Finesse, Focus and Specialisation, and since it's a light weapon) makes you a fool.

Gloves of storing ...

So that'd be two shortswords (the sensible Tempest), the dual-falchion Tempest of Doom(TM), the spiked chain and the greatsword? How many hands do you have?

And rogues, and anyone who takes a couple levels of rogue or barbarian, and anyone who gets armor of fortification. Or one of the many PrCs that grant uncanny dodge.

Rogues only take 125 points instead of the full 180, as I said (though this may be adjusted upwards as they generally have worse ACs than fighters), but this is still able to kill a 12th level rogue of average rolls with 18 Con. Casters are unlikely to want to multiclass as it delays spell progression, paladins are unlikely to take levels of rogue and cannot take barbarian; monks likewise; bards have too few hit points to survive with the reduced 125. The fighter/barbarian, fighter/rogue, ranger/barbarian or ranger/rogue build are the only common multiclassing builds likely to survive the barrage, and even some of these are iffy: the fighter/rogue, assuming nine levels of fighter and three of rogue needs a Con of 20 or better to survive and is likely to be soaking up points in Str and Dex. The ranger/rogue has the same predicament.

Poor selection process. Most high CR opponents are going to be classed individuals, frequently powerful undead, humanoids or other individuals with possible access to magical powers

Dependent on campaign style. We could argue this forever without coming to a solution one way or the other. For the purposes of the build, detailed below, I'll go by your parameters and mainly have classed and/or intelligent opponents.

Sure, give me some time.

What we'll do is this. Make the build (not too min/max please!) and assume that the party wizard and party cleric are happy to each give one second level buff and one third level buff, for a total of two second and two third. Anything over and above needs to soaked up by buying Pearls of Power. Equipment will be standard (DMG) for a 12th level PC.

The scenarios will be thus: the prospective characters will first go toe-to-toe with each other. They will then go against a 12th level cleric, 12th level rogue, 12th level wizard and 12th level barbarian (all from DMG). They then go against a CR 12 aberration (frost worm), CR 12 dragon (adult green) and CR 12 undead (10th vampire fighter). Based on the results of the eight fights, it should be apparent which is the better in combat. Foes with magic can be assumed to use buffs so long as they last 12 hours or more (as per Pax's guidelines). Subsidiary benefits should also be taken into account, since I am intending to multiclass into rogue.

Do you accept that this is a fair and balanced representation of 12th level opponents? Then let the game begin...

 

[Storm Raven]

Storm Raven has been talking about a fighter with three levels of barbarian as his stock meleeist. This means that he can rage *1* time per day. One =/= several. Nor is it right to assume that this one time lasts all day.

No, that has been your assumption. I have been noting a meleeist with some levels of barbarian, for a 12th level character an even split between barbarian and fighter is logical. You have been assuming two or three levels of barbarian.

Ignoring the fact that for bows and arrows, stacking elemental damage is a far more efficient method of boosting damage. This also ignores Weapon Specialisation, PBS, sneak attack, Bracers of Archery etc. within 30'.

Weapon Specialization is a wash. Stacking elemental damage has inherent limitations, as there are only so many elemental types to add to a weapon.

What we'll do is this. Make the build (not too min/max please!) and assume that the party wizard and party cleric are happy to each give one second level buff and one third level buff, for a total of two second and two third. Anything over and above needs to soaked up by buying Pearls of Power. Equipment will be standard (DMG) for a 12th level PC.

Looks like you are going to be buying at least one pearl of power: for your second GMW, since it is a 4th level cleric spell.

 

[LokiDR]

Any person who states that a melee character will ignore the front line and go straight to the archer is agreeing that the archer is more powerful.

 

[Caliber]

=/=

I'm staying out of this discussion. I just wanted to point out that you were likely thinking of =!.

 

[LokiDR]

I'm staying out of this discussion. I just wanted to point out that you were likely thinking of =!.

From the code poet:
"!=" in most languages.