This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Warlock article.

Be polite
Assume good faith
Be welcoming

Blood Elf Succubus?Edit

The article makes it look like Blood Elf Warlocks don't get the Succubus pet, is that true? And why? Do we have links to blue posts on this subject? I was going to reroll Blood Elf Warlock but I am not sure now. More info on this would be nice if it's true. If not then their might be a problem with how the article is setup. --Buraisu 15:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I imagine all you're seeing is that Blood Elves don't have their own specific version of the Succubus quest, and they just need to complete the Orc or Undead version of the quest. Haven't done it myself tho. But the odds of BE warlocks not having a key ability is infinitesimal compared to the odds of wowwiki being incomplete. :-) 17:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
The article also doesn't mention that blood elves should do the orc or undead Voidwalker quest instead of their own. Its a LOT easier. And for the record, yes, BE warlocks do either the orc or undead succy quest. I did the orc one.--Darth603 04:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Damage over time spellsEdit

I originally had changed the statement on warlocks having the most powerful DoT spells to the most formidable thinking that SW:P had higher dps however upon theorycraft it turns out it was correct originally. Just some evidence in case somebody makes this change again in the future
Shadow Word Pain (Rank 10) dps = 1236/18 = 68.67dps
Curse of Doom (Rank 2) dps = 4200/60 = 70.0dps
Curse of Agony (Rank 7) dps = 1356/24 = 56.5dps

spell details taken from


according to Curse of Doom it gets +200% bonus from +spelldamage equip while Curse of Agony only receives 120%; so CoD does a lot more DPS than CoA -watchout 10:22, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
The comment above is precisely wrong: it forgets that CoA takes only 24 seconds to do its work, and therefore gains 300% of spell damage per minute if reapplied. In other words, with enough spell damage CoA will exceed CoD DPS because it scales better -pdenhaan 19:01, 10 September 2007 (BST)


I have no idea if I'm allowed to type here but I have a question. I have a level 19 twink Warlock (Kcpearl). I have all my equipment and enchantrs except one. I've been wondering if I should get +25 agility to my stave or +22 int? Under agility it says it increases ranged attack power and crit chance to all weapons. I DoT Fear Wand. My wand has a higher dps than my spells. I was wondering if Agility would help me our not? I know int increases spell crit chance but I only use DoTs. I'm not sure and about this issue and I was informed to come here and ask.

This is really a basic question about Warlocks, but when I look at the article I see no information on what stats are important for the Warlock. -- LarsPensjo 05:36, 25 August 2006 (EDT)
Firstly, please sign your posts. Makes it easier. Second, stats are incredibly dependant on what kind of warlock you intend to be. There are ones that survive, ones that never run out of mana, ones that will crit you for 8billion damage (ok, so 10k is the highest ive ever seen), ones who can dot-n-run. The warlock is a jack of many trades. I, personally, am a dps lock with high spell damage, but fairly low life and mana. When i run low on mana, i life tap, and drain mana. due to my high spell damage, i can fully heal myself with drain life and syphon, while my dots do massive damage. I can also crit for a good 1700 with shadowbolt due to SM/Ruin.
Basically, the formula i follow is:
  • Demonology: Int and Stam above damage and crit. these will keep you and your pet alive. Demonologists usually tend to have more life and mana than others due to embrace and more int gear than damage gear.
  • Affliction: High damage +. lots of affliction locks like to focus as much on their dot damage, then crit, then life, then mana. This is what i do. My dots are killer, and i survive fairly well. However, if my drains are interrupted and my dots dispelled, im a gonner.
  • Destruction: Destro locks are a very different blend. they either go for huge fire damage for conflag and searing pain and soul fire, huge magic damage to switch off from shadowbolt to conflag, or huge crit to make their soul fires and shadowbolts make everyone cry. Destro is a very specific tree, and without the right gear and play style, you are like a weak mage.
So overall, the warlock doesnt need 1 stat, str is useless, spirit is almost useless (as we can life tap, healthstone, battery our poor pets, and have armor that helps us restore life). i personally have never seen a wand-using warlock above dots or casts, but at lv 19 that might make sense. However, i would suggest at that level to try to get a 30 spell enchant to your staff, and a 20 shadow damage to gloves if you can afford it, and simply put on coa, corruption, fear, and wand. with that much damage, your dots would be very frightening (and try to get some spellpower goggles XL. they are deadly as hell at that level, albeit slightly difficult to obtain). Hope i helped!--Haddon 21:08, 26 August 2006 (EDT)
I added a section about the Warlock attributes. LarsPensjo 00:21, 31 August 2006 (EDT)

The ranking of attributes is getting a little long, and I'm not sure that I agree completely with some of the recent changes from the BC Patches. Right now the list is:

  1.  Stamina
  2. +Spell Damage (especially valuable as it now boosts both DoTs and nukes as well as Life Tap)
  3. Intellect
  4. Spell crit
  5. Spell hit
  6. Health regeneration (+X Health per Y seconds)
  7. Mana regeneration (+X Mana per Y seconds)
  8. Spirit
  9. Agility 

Argumentatively, wouldn't Spell hit be more useful than Spell crit? Unless you are a Heavy Destrucion you may not be relying on high-crits. Also, does Int really come before either of those? And if we're making a BIG list... where does Resilience fall into this list? Or is that more of an every class needs it kind of stat? -GSeven 23:55, 15 February 2007 (CDT)

I agree, the ranking attributes list is subjective. Personally, I prefer +spell damage over stamina and spell hit over spell crit.--Curtis E Bare 13:14, 20 February 2007 (EST)

I also have to agree with the issue of what's on this list. I think we should use a seperate list for each basic spec, and remove spirit and agility all together. The reason for that being that those stats are no more helpful for warlocks than they are for any other cloth class. Health regen should probably be removed too, as there are all of mebbe 4 items in game with +hp/5s that a warlock can use, and at least one of those things (resurgence rod) is not worth it in end game. There can be a nice comment about these stats near the end of the section. I'll put together a suggestion and post it in a day or two. -- DuTempete 11:09, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

Agility and Spirit are still on the list, and don't ask me why. Now that we've got 2.3, agility and spirit are things of the past for warlocks. Heck, new warlocks may even get enough +spell damage to be able to seriously drain tank at before outland.

I've heard some debate about spell haste replacing spell damage in the near future, but I highly doubt that, at least for affliction warlocks. Most of us only use one castbar spell when not raiding (UA), and spell haste doesn't seem to mix well with channelled spells and dots. So I dare say its not likely to happen.--Darth603 04:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that Agility doesn't affect damage from Wands; even though it's "White" damage, the damage caused by the wand is actually a SPELL type (Shadow, Fire, Nature, etc.). For your question on whether to get Agility or Intellect, I'd say go for the Int. Felindre

Curse of Weakness Edit

Several macros make clever use of Curse of Weakness. But is anyone really using this curse? I think it has general been regarded as a waste of mana, better spent for doing some addition damage instead. If that is the case, then these macros should not be recommended. -- LarsPensjo 01:10, 16 August 2006 (EDT)

I have to agree with you on that. I've never found it to be particuarly useful. At it's maxumum level it only reduces damage by 31 and the more you need damage reduction the more that 31 becomes a drop in the bucket of the damage dealt by that monster. Better to use CoA or a CoS/CoE to increase the damage you or your party do to it and just kill it quicker. The sooner it's dead the less damage it can deal. --Evil Iggy 00:58, 29 August 2006 (EDT)

I'll thrown in my 2Copper. Curse of Weakness shines when you either have no other curses available (yay low level alts!) or... There's an extremely fast attacker. I've been willing to extend this to rogues and any other agility classes, but the vibe from the (old) forums seems to be that on hunter pet's, CoW may be appropriate. It's a debuff whose return is directly proportional to the number of attacks that the monster produces, not the strength.--Hobinheim 11:50, 31 August 2006 (EDT)

It seems like its viability is a matter of opinion, so it should probably stay up at least for players who do use Curse of Weakness, even if there aren't many. // Montagg (talk · contr) 17:45, 27 October 2006 (EDT)
I use Curse of Weakness when I am unmounted and running past monsters or running away from monsters. Because if you know your not going to kill it and it's just going to hit and follow you, might as well take less damage. Also, I gotta agree on fast hiting enemies. Sword Speced Rogues normaly have a lot of haste. When you see a rogue duel-wielding Warglaive of Azzinoth THE ROGUE HAS A LOT OF HASTE! +200% anyone? (Most likely the person has 2-4 different items adding haste with the legendary plus Slice and Dice and Blade Flurry). Hope fear doesn't fail you. --Buraisu 15:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I personally think Curse of Weakness is a waste of Mana after you start getting other Curses. If Curse of Shadow and Curse of the Elements are already on the mob (or, after Patch 2.4.3 comes out, Curse of Elements on its own), and there isn't a need for Curse of Tongues or Curse of Recklessness, every other Warlock should be throwing on Curse of Agony. Felindre

Size of article and redundance Edit

I get the feeling that this article is too big, including information already available at special pages. Because of that, I have removed some of the reduncancy and moved some information. More remains to do. -- LarsPensjo 06:38, 25 August 2006 (EDT)

Warlock-related pages Edit

There are a couple articles relating to warlocks called Warlock PvE guide, Warlock PvP guide, Warlock mana efficiency, and Warlock: Working with Other Classes. I think some of these articles could be more tightly integrated with the main article. A couple are very intricate, and should probably remain their own articles, but I'd like to at least see a small section devoted to the topic with a Main article [[here]] tag at the top of the section.

What do you guys think? // Montagg (talk · contr) 15:56, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

After seeing that most of those articles are part of a larger set and should probably remain unchanged, I simply added the relevant ones at the bottom of this article in the See Also section. // Montagg (talk · contr) 17:41, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

Separte Lore from GameEdit

I think the intro and history should be moved to the warlock lore section. This page should have descriptions of what a warlock is and its role in a party/raid in-game.--Grid 18:45, 25 November 2006 (EST)

Agreed. --Hobinheim 19:12, 25 November 2006 (EST)

Apparenly Fel Magic is not outlawed in Ironforge, there is a Warlock Trainer in IF, in the Forlorn Caverns

according to warlock questlines it is and this warlock trainer in IF is actually not doing much and trying not to draw attention to himself, thats why you go to Stormwind for all the class quests. Also in Stormwind Warlocks are not all too welcome thats why the slaughtered lamb has its "secret" cellars -watchout 21:43, 4 January 2007 (EST)

Warlock Quests Edit

Was just wondering if it would be smart to have links to all the Warlock quests on this page.--Yelmurc 11:22, 4 January 2007 (EST)

see Warlock quests -watchout 13:04, 4 January 2007 (EST)

I see that they are all there was just wondering why their was not a link on the Warlock Class Page. I'm not saying we add the whole guide to a page but maybe a link thats easy to find.--Yelmurc 17:45, 4 January 2007 (EST)

there is a link in the class-overview-box-thingy in the upper right - warlock line, quests. Though I have to admit if you dont know where to search, youll likely not find it -watchout 21:39, 4 January 2007 (EST)

Maybe we should make it easier to find. --Yelmurc 19:34, 5 January 2007 (EST)

Unarmed Combat Edit

I re-added the ability to use Unarmed combat. I guess I just don't understand why one would remove it in the first place.

>> GSeven talk  | contr | web 10:34, 16 February 2007 (EST)

Simplification updates Edit

I fancied adding a bit more chat to this page, hope you guys like it, and you feel that it remains true to the Neutral point of view. --Zamael 04:53, 20 February 2007 (EST)

Although actually now I take a second look at it, it looks awful. How come the Mage page is so short?

Project: Warlock Articles Edit

I've started a project to organize and polish the warlock articles. If you'd like to participate, I'm in the process of setting up a game plan at User:DuTempete/Warlock project. Let's make this a class-wide effort to make WoW Wiki the best source of Warlock information we can! DuTempete talk | contr 22:09, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Hullabaloo Edit

It's not unknown that some players believe that warlocks are over-powered. Perhaps we should include this in the article?


--Kjærleik 07:14, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't think this is the place for that. This article is for factual Warlock information, and advice/opinion on how best to play the class. What you're talking about, if it even has a place in this wiki, would best be put into a separate article.n DuTempete talk|contr 19:42, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

Agreed, the troll-speak terms nerf/buff/overpowered/balanced/underpowered should not appear in any article, and referencing any in-game mechanic, class or ability to them is going to quickly turn an article into flames. I don't think that kind of discussion belongs on the wiki whatsoever because it's not constructive discussion. It's just puerile. --Mekkapiano 12:47, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

What's the point of a Destrolock?! Edit

Ok I've put serious thought into this and I just can't think of an answer. Why would anyone, anyone at all, seriously want to spec as a destrolock? (Destruction warlock) I mean most talents of a destrolock have an equivalent in a mages fire talents, even some destro spells have mage equivalents which the mage equivalent is often superior to a destrolock's spell. So could someone please help me to understand the value of speccing into destruction, when you could just be a mage.Feldaldor 00:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The point is speed. Destro spec'd warlocks excel in pvp, because they can take down someone far faster that those of other specs. Speccing somewhat into Destro used to be good for raiding, but I think that has been overshadowed by post-BC affliction and demonology talents. I rarely see any Destro spec'd warlocks who PvE much, anymore. --DuTempete talk|contr 07:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I have to say that I raid as a destro/demo sac specced lock, and am ALWAYS on top of the damage meters when I sacrifice and imp for fire damage. Obviously focused on direct damage instead of dots, cast rotation is CoE, immolate, incineratex5?, repeat. This is on top of better-geared locks that are shadow (usually take 2nd place), rogues in 3rd place, and mages in fourth. We currently raid TK and The Eye. Just some food for thought. mchoekst 31 August 2007
True that. Affliction warlocks have a very bad time in PVP, especially if they took the points for accellerated AOE fear and put it into something more useful in PVE- where you rarely use fear because the mobs usually come back with two or three friends. If I ever go back to my warlock, I'll probably respec her as destro and teach those stunlock rogues a thing or two. But yeah, the reason for destro is to get a build with decent burst damage, because that's what kills in PVP.
That having been said, I have seen a few full to semi-Destro warlocks raiding. Most of them gear like fire mages.--Darth603 04:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
I could just as easily ask why one would be a fire specced mage. It's a matter of taste. Even if they played exactly the same in combat some might prefer summoning/imp-buff/dots/pets better than food/water/portals. Although that's not the case and warlocks are capable of more DPS (in my experience) than fire mages when geared equally especially when they sac the imp. The better hybrid PvE/P builds are light in other trees heavier Destro. Personally I run 7/7/47. --Darkbeat

Warlock face off thought/situation. Edit

Alright, this is another thing I've thought about. Three warlocks, one specced into Affliction, one Specced into Demonology, and the third Specced into Destruction.All three are at equal levels, and same race. Each one fights each of the other two, one on one. Each of the warlocks may only use their spec of spells (Aka Aff lock may only use affliction spells), with the exceptions of Shadowbolt,Fel armor, and fear. Who would beat who in one on one, and why?Feldaldor 00:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

That entirely depends on who gets off the first fear, I think. If the destruction lock manages to avoid getting feared, I would imagine the others would be toast. If the destruction lock is feared and taken down, it'd be a toss up between the other two; whomever is better at pvping. But all in all, the spec is only as good as the player. --DuTempete talk|contr 07:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
It might just be me but it sounds like you're a destro fan :DFeldaldor 04:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Felguard CHARGE! Warlock RUN! Demonology wins... lol Fast summon, run, resummon, run, resummon, run etc. Now if you couldn't run... then it depends on who gets the first fear off. Remebering Banish is a Demonology move and the others can't use it. --Buraisu 15:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Huh? Banish is a warlock spell. It doesn't matter what spec you are; you can use both ranks of it. I'd like to know who's feeding you such BS, so I can smack them around a bit! --DuTempete talk|contr
03:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Um Tempete let me remind you the rules of my hypothetical situation... the spec warlocks may only use spells of THEIR spec. Banish is a demonology spell, so if my hypoithetical situation were to actually happen only the demonology warlock would have the ability to use banish. Kenneth Koubek 06:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Warlocks were Shaman?! Edit

Citation, plskthx! --DuTempete talk|contr 07:36, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

RotH, you silly goose. The whole books half about that and half about the draenei being slaughtered. --Sky (t · c · w) 07:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Kinda surprised me too, I've never really seen a connection. I'm sure Sky knows what he is talking about more then me, and I am not about to go out and buy some books I will doubtfully read.   Zurr  TC 07:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I think Sky is full of --it. Tongueout --DuTempete talk|contr 08:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
No citation required. That was fruits of the war on Draenor when the Orcs were unwittingly led against the Draenei by Archimonde, disguised as the Orc ancestors at first. Shamans were the only orcs gifted with 'magical' abilities, and Archimonde showed them how to summon forth demons and utilise dark magics. If you still demand citation, go pick up 'Rise of the Horde' by Christie Golden or ask if your local library can get it if you're a skin-flint. Amazing book and full of lore. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Celess (talkcontr).

Need to get rid of the blog links Edit

Like someone else said, this isn't a link repository. Linking to blogs is totally pointless unless it's the personal blog of one of the game designers or something. That kind of stuff borders on advertising. --Mekkapiano 00:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

The one you removed is a weekly column, not a blog, Mekka. I will go through the links and make sure they're not trolls if you like, though. Tongueout--DuTempete talk|contr 01:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
All of those external links look fine to me. They're links to someone else's intellectual property, and by linking to their sites, rather than participating in the wiki, they're saying they'd rather not submit that property to communal critique and change, which is perfectly acceptable. They're not degrading the wiki by putting their links here, rather, they're improving it by keeping our wiki open to the rest of the WoW community in general, and increasing the amount of information and advice that is at the fingertips of the folks who come here. --DuTempete talk|contr 01:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, guess I overreacted to that one. It's more of a general thing that's happening to the wiki overall. People are dumping links to pretty random blog entries or pretty redundant external pages that just rehash the same info. Some is blatantly just people linking to their personal site (but those all get spotted and reverted). It's akin to the "sticky growth" you see on forums - everyone thinks their little piece of info is important but eventually all the signal gets lost in the noise. I shouldn't have reverted that particular link, to be honest. --Mekkapiano 16:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that stuff is going to happen. We just need to be vigilant about it, especially in such a community as ours, where people are freely able to put up whatever they want. --DuTempete talk|contr 21:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

more namedroppingEdit

Many players have played the the Warlock Class and some are simply legends in the game of World of Warcraft. Prior to The Burning Crusade (Blizzard's first expansion) legends like Kralnor, Drakedog, and Killakast were working hard to prove that the warlock class should not be over looked in any aspect of the game, as they truly displayed their attributes adequately in World of Warcraft. There was a time in World of Warcraft where warlocks were simply confused with Mages 90% of the time by the average player. Consistently being asked for water or portals to other cities. The Warlock population was at and all time low (10% on most servers) so very little was known about this unique class, but there was a lot to be told.

Warlocks are truly harder to master then any other class, but when used properly can be considered the class of choice for most occasions. In a player versus player environment a warlock must learn to control a fight against your opponent. Time is on your side being a damage over time (D.O.T.) class, learn to use time to your advantage and you will see all the benefits time has to offer. The fear ability is a great tool for achieving this goal. Keeping your distance from melee classes will be tough, so use your spells wisely and you will be successful.

Warlocks are Good at both: Player vs. Player (Fighting with or amongst other players, Battlegrounds, Arenas etc.) Plaver vs. Environment (Raid, Dungeons, Solo Farming)

Players that have proven to be fun to watch through the years:

Drakedog Realm: Azshara Guild: EE Play Platform:(PVP) Featured in the armory

Killakast Realm: Drenden Guild: Identified as Trouble Play Platform: (PVE) Featured in the armory

Kralnor Realm: Ner'zhul Guild: We Punt Gnomes Play Platform: (General) Featured in the armory (Kralnor is also featured on the fourms!)

-- Mikejordin (talkcontr)

"Warlocks were once mages..." Edit

Per this problem report, Special:ProblemReports/9789, the intro has been changed from mages to arcanists. However, this may still not be ideal and the intro could perhaps do with a rewrite for clarity? Kirkburn  talk  contr 21:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thats like saying Catholics were once Christians. And some warlocks started as warlocks. Would changing it to "Many Warlocks were once magess or, in case of the orcs, shamans, who, in pursuit of ever-greater sources of power,..." rectify both problems? The whole mages and warlocks thing comes from many sources such as the RPG corebook, The Last Guardian, and in many cases its not one citable phrase but rather an ongoing theme throughout the books. Warthok Talk Contribs 05:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
The arcanist to warlock progression is something from the WoW corebook. While I know that the idea that many of the alliance warlocks originates from the Kirin Tor. Kirin Tor frowns on demonic and necromantic magic. I couldn't find specific quotes on the issue... LIke you said its seems to be a theme but not necessarily said in exact phrases.Baggins (talk) 08:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


Removed this from Coming in WotLK. We already have that In game. Chaos of Warcraft (talk) 18:00, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

We do? I thought so too, but Blizzard said it was new at WWI and people had a big reaction from it. :S --   18:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Maby youre thinking of Demonic Circle? Chaos of Warcraft (talk) 18:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Nope, definitely said that. Exact words were "Warlocks will be able to summon players outside instances" with a cheer from crowd and then went onto explain why this is, players being late or needing to go buy things etc. :S --   19:35, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I thought that went into the game (also) in like, 2.3 or 2.4. /me goes to check the notes. --Sky (t · c · w) 19:36, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Thought so. Patch 2.4.0#Warlocks. --Sky (t · c · w) 19:38, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

This requires some explanation. To the WoWWiki-mobile! Chaos of Warcraft (talk) 19:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

3.0 changesEdit

This article seems out of date as of patch 3.0; i.e. warlocks having massive dps and utility in the End Game Expectations section. I'd update this myself but i'm not really sure what warlocks are expected to do as of 3.0, or if they're even brought to raids anymore. Vreivai (talk) 04:31, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

There are also some new warlock talents that do not have articles yet, such Haunt. Vreivai (talk) 05:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Some changes that need to be made: GENERAL - Spirit is now useful for locks as Fel Armor now increases spellpower by 30% of your spirit. DEMON CHANGES - Felhunter no longer has paranoia buff, instead it has the spirit/intellect buff. Voidwalker's consume shadows no longer increases the demon's AP for 10 mins but increases party/raids stealth detection. (Only while channeling? Unclear.)

- Stealth detection is only active when demon channels it. Bloodchills

DEMONOLOGY - Metamorphosis, Demonic Pact, Soul Link doesn't increase spellpower anymore, Master Demonologist gives completely different buffs AFFLICTION - Haunt DESTRUCTION - Chaos Bolt Just a few things I can think of off the top of my head. I've been a Demonology lock my whole WoW career, so when I get time I'll write some stuff up about the demon tree changes, but someone else will have to do the Destro/Aff ones. Xtoq (talk) 00:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Destruction warlocks have just gotten a huge ram in the behind with 3.0, particularly the Shadowbolt spamming kind like I was despite the improvements. In the beginning, I found I was getting about the same DPS as pre-patch with my gear/spec/playing style. Then began hearing vast improvemets in DPS by other builds. It wouldn't be that bad if they got improvements to match the DPS, but they improved well pass that marker. For a semi comparison, I have a basically fully boomkin spec druid (I have points in resto for mana to keep me pumping for longer so any points I scavenge from there will only increase my DPS since most of the time will be spent in short, non-boss fights) which can pump 1000DPS with 1000 +spl pwr. My fully Destro spec will do about 1000DPS with 1300 +spl pwr, when relying on Shadowbolt and it's procs. Clothy hit-with-crit gear has been hard to come by in my travels making it even harder for the destro lock to DPS. I've had Affliction (in longer DoT friendly fights) and Demon locks (sizeble chunk is by the Felguard) match my output with less spell power (I suppose gear quality difference is implied). Given the only talents I could only put points into was crowd control with Pyroclasm, aggro pulling Searing Pain, pet with the Imp Firebolt, or the fire spec, it's definitely broken unless crit is suppose to save it. I've switched to firelock and managed to squeeze 300-500DPS out of the same gear (though a chunk would be by the little Imp cannon which I always have out for Empowered Imp), play style (replaced SB with Incinerate), and spell rotation. If Sartharion was immune to fire, I'd be screwed. A'lar and a few other old worlds still are, though which was why I never went firelock before, even though I considered it... I can do a bit of the updating as well given this is my main. I just have to work out the style and whether this page should be retained and renamed to Warlock 2.0 and the "current" page be straight "Warlock" or "Warlock 3.0"Rei-gouki (talk) 15:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Alliance Warlock are Former Mages. was that retconned?Edit

was that retconned?--Knighthonor (talk) 04:23, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Next Warlock MinionEdit

This is more for fun than anything else. So, what do you want to see as the next warlock demon? I'm crossing my fingers for satyr. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WoW Fan Story Writer (talkcontr). 12:20, September 11, 2010

Please read the header at the top of the page. If you wish make a speculation topic, please use the WW:FORUM. And sign your posts. Thank you, User:Coobra/Sig4 20:02, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism? Edit

Has this page been vandalised or what? There's only one word: Cvece 18:34, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.