Scoop! Leaked notes at least partially accurate!

[Quark]

Good posts, both bonemage and mjdoom.

[Raelynn]

This right here is partially what I'm talking about.  When people ask what Rogues could possibly complain about, we don't say "bugs."  We say "Vanish doesn't work; we don't get combo points on openers" and other non-bug issues.  So, excuse my ignorance, but what are the Warlock bugs?

One more thing: can you try to hit "reply" to the post you're referring or actually replying to?  It keeps threaded view cleaner.
[right][snapback]73409[/snapback][/right]

The reason most warlocks don't quote specific issues is because of this

With this number of bugs and things that may be bugs and may just be intended effects that people wouldn't realize right away, it's hard for warlocks to say something like "*such and such* doesn't work".

[bonemage]

I appreciate the comments on these. You have valid points. I also don't believe all of the complaints listed in my above post. I sprinkled in some of my opinions with a overall attempt at a summary. I'm sure it was difficult to follow what was my opinion and other was a restate of a heard complaint. There was some disjointedness (is that a real word?) in my post as it was done while distracted at work (yes, I have time for this, but this post will likely have some of the same issues), and sometimes PvP is 1v1 and sometimes group. Sorry for that, you needed ESP to detect that. I'm also sure my post came across much more negative than I am about warlocks. I love them. Again, some of the complaints listed in my previous post aren't mine.

My point of comparing warlocks to mages and priests is that we have fewer effective choices in a PvP setting (mainly 1v1) as a warlock has a vast number of channeled spells. These don't work in the 1v1 setting. I listed two instant spells and discussed those. Shadowbolts are too slow and interupted too many times in a single cast to be effective. Searing pain is better IMO. In a 1v1 setting, I really don't see any issues with the warlock. My experience in dueling (limited as it is) reinforced that. I've always done quite well in the duels I've been involved in. My assumed lack of skill about myself due to lack of experience makes me think that warlocks rock. My complaints there in my post weren't mine. Sorry for the lack of clarity. I used my positive dueling experience to reinforce my statement that they are strong duelers. PvP is not dueling though. I took the time to choose my pet and prep for the fight. Slightly different than the unexpected encounter. But, all my experience supports that warlocks are scary 1v1 opponents. By bringing up the continued nerfs, was to help explain why warlocks are so negative. We have some big issues that aren't being addressed. We do however, find ourselves subjected to nerf after nerf.

Further explanation behind the duel aspect was to illustrate the sheer number of shards I burned, and the downtime to recover. I burned a pet and a healthstone in each fight. Meaning I had a 10 second summon after each battle to get another pet. Not a luxary in group PvP. No one please bring up the demonology talents to summon pets faster. One thing that warlock's hate is the fact that most feel they need to be demonology specced to be useful in PvP. Most of that tree is loaded with crap. Add a couple of shards for shadowburn and you're burning a dozen shards every couple encounters. Also, as far as not being on the front and taking hits in group PvP, who get attacked first in Group PvP? Squishies. You will be targeted pretty quickly and channeled spells, and therefore gaining shards even whe it is a possibility are out. The DoTs in group PvP are useful, especially smaller skirmishes to be sure that those fleeing only move the location of their corpse's resting place.

My personal issues with warlocks are the shards (especially PvP), and the fact that high end pets (hearsay) rewards aren't worth the risk. I love the enslave demon idea, and like the higher risk, but currently there isn't much to show for it. That is from a lot of reading, my warlock is level 52.

PvE, I have no issues. I don't feel like I'm outdamaging the mage however, and I do have Ruin, which is the talent that doubles damage on crits rather than the 50% of a normal crit. I'm sure that's what you were referring to when talking destruction based. An exception is when there are effective tanks and I can DoT several mobs. Then I think I'll out DPS a mage, but I was thinking single target. In longer fights, I'm sure my DPS is quite good, but smaller, properly engaged encounters don't give my DoTs enough time to be effective, and even Bane talented shadowbolts are a bit slow. Searing pain with curse of elements is quite nice and casting time is low. However, this is quite likely to get aggro, so I use it only when things go wrong and I'm trying to either kill them before they kill me, or take aggro off the healer, who, by the way, is tougher than I am, as he is a druid, but better I die than he.

So, to try to sum up my rambling post. I only have a few issues with warlocks, but I voiced more than my own in my original post. I was trying to be thorough (though Icebird pointed out some glaring options) in my list, as what I listed were repeated complaints in the forums. As I don't play on a PvP server, I wanted to give some voice to their complaints, beyond the ones that are my own. I don't have the experience to disprove some of the complaints as invalid. You have provided some evidence that they are not valid, and I tend to agree with you.

[bonemage]

The warrior post is actually much like the Warlock posts. Sure, its 4 pages long, but warlocks have 5 different blue stickies, and how much did that help them? The post contains little explanation and is mostly a very long statement that everything is working as intended. The warrior post is/was just as useless, and there haven't been any followup/replies/blue posts there in over 2 months.

A good example of a useful post would be the Druid's one - their complaints were understood, they actually got the much needed buffs that they requested (DD cat form finisher, Barkskin, etc), and it was direct and to a point.

P.S. I understood that warlocks will be getting shards if they kill someone in pvp who was green or higher to them - so perhaps that will solve at least some problems there. Hopefully it will apply to group kills too - since there the odds of getting a killing blow can go down quite a bit.
[right][snapback]73410[/snapback][/right]

They will be getting shards in PvP vs players (not PvP enabled NPCs), however, as in my original lenghty posting, will only marginally help, due to issues with Drain Soul being a channeled, low damage, 3 second tic DoT, which isn't a very good idea in PvP. It will help, sure, but is severely lacking, IMO.

I disagree with you on the warrior/warlock postings. Kalgan addresses MANY specific issues and addressed each one in detail and offers a good arguement behind the reasoning/balance of the issue/skill/talent. Even if the end result is "working as intended", the warriors know they were heard. He also mentions many times that they are aware of the initial rage issue, and that Bloodrage needs to be reworked. The warlocks don't get any real helpful design input from developers, or why things were or weren't intended. "Enslave demon is not dispellable", but enslave demon is still crap is a recent buff/nerf package. There's less healthy discussion of the class from designer view to player view. Kalgan proves he understands and hears the warriors. Eyonix has yet to prove that to warlocks.

P.S. It might be of some note to point out that I only play these two classes, but my warrior is of low level.

Edit: Changed appropriate poster in my link, Tyren posted, but the content was from Kalgan.

[Skandranon]

Then I think I'll out DPS a mage, but I was thinking single target. 
[right][snapback]73415[/snapback][/right]

You'll out DPS a mage on a single target, too.

Warlocks who complain about mages doing more damage than them have never played mages, I think, or haven't played a mage since their overpowered stage in beta.

As it stands, warlocks have better single target damage, better crowd control, better DoT, comparable AoE, and useful tricks like summoning people, soulstones, and healthstones. I'd take a warlock over a mage in a party any time; the only thing warlocks can't do is conjure water.

By all means...fix the bugs. But warlock players who think their class is weak are simply delusional.

[bonemage]

You'll out DPS a mage on a single target, too.

Warlocks who complain about mages doing more damage than them have never played mages, I think, or haven't played a mage since their overpowered stage in beta.

As it stands, warlocks have better single target damage, better crowd control, better DoT, comparable AoE, and useful tricks like summoning people, soulstones, and healthstones.  I'd take a warlock over a mage in a party any time; the only thing warlocks can't do is conjure water.

By all means...fix the bugs.  But warlock players who think their class is weak are simply delusional.
[right][snapback]73420[/snapback][/right]

I'll have to test that some, but Arcane Missles with Curse of Shadows seems to trump Curse of Shadows with Shadowbolts, which is how I've been trying to compare the two. I have not tested it scientifically. I'll take a warlock's ability to survive over a mage's any day for sure. Much less of a glass cannon.

I don't feel the warlock is a weak class, though my first post would give that impression. It's all part of my mixing of revoicing and my opinions.

[Icebird]

I'll add my personal thoughts here (as opposed to reiterating the warlock forum consensus).

I have no complaints about warlock damage. We may do slightly less damage as the mage, but then again, we don't need to sit and drink as often either.

I don't do much PvP combat... yet. But there are lots of ways to spend shards in PvP combat, and this moment, no way to gain them back.

Collecting and farming shards is an inconveniece. I tend to only carry around 3 or 4 at a time - sometimes less, because of the inventory space they take up. However I find need far more shards in instances than I do soloing - I might have to change pet several times for different opponents. A soul stone for the rezzer every half hour. Healthstones for whoever wants them (always surprises me how many people don't). Summoning people from far off places. It's very easy to complete burn through your shard collection, and in instances I find it very easy to leave it too late to cast Drain Soul, so the target is dead before I can get a shard. There are a number of ways Blizzard could make soul shards less of a chore.

It's also irritating if you run out of shards in a low-level area where there are no XP generating mobs around.

I hope they fix Enslave Demon to make re-enslaving worthwhile. The Infernal and Doomguard are currently useless because of it, and it nerfs what should be one of your coolest spells (enslaving random demons in the world to fight on our behalf).

The bug that annoys me most personally is the tendency of pets to disappear if they get too far away from. Mostly because it means another wasted soul shard. They also disappear if you use a Gryphon.

The 8 slot limit on debuffs is a big concern to me. Even in a party of 5 I've noticed the slots filling up very quickly (warrior shouts, hunter stings, any kind of proc effect, stuns, saps etc...). Warlocks do good damage when they combine their direct damage spells (Drain Life, Shadowbolt) with Curses and DoT spells. If we can't use half our arsenal because they take up slots that a raid group wants to save for other debuffs we lose a lot of our effectiveness. Or we use our debuffs, only to find them bumped seconds later.

Chris

[lemekim]

They will be getting shards in PvP vs players (not PvP enabled NPCs), however, as in my original lenghty posting, will only marginally help, due to issues with Drain Soul being a channeled, low damage, 3 second tic DoT, which isn't a very good idea in PvP.  It will help, sure, but is severely lacking, IMO.

I disagree with you on the warrior/warlock postings.  Tyren addresses MANY specific issues and addressed each one in detail and offers a good arguement behind the reasoning/balance of the issue/skill/talent.  Even if the end result is "working as intended", the warriors know they were heard.  He also mentions many times that they are aware of the initial rage issue, and that Bloodrage needs to be reworked.  The warlocks don't get any real helpful design input from developers, or why things were or weren't intended.  "Enslave demon is not dispellable", but enslave demon is still crap is a recent buff/nerf package.  There's less healthy discussion of the class from designer view to player view.  Tyren proves he understands and hears the warriors.  Eyonix has yet to prove that to warlocks.

P.S.  It might be of some note to point out that I only play these two classes, but my warrior is of low level.
[right][snapback]73416[/snapback][/right]

I was probably unclear in my statement - as I understand the statement about shard collection, you won't need to use Drain Soul on the target to acquire the shard. Does it sound viable now?

I didn't want to go into warrior problems since this is not the topic, but Tyren avoided most of the important issues, and there was absolutely no reply to the flood of warrior questions that followed this post. At least warlocks got some replies to their questions to the post. I can point out that they addressed in their posts that they are aware and are working on fixing several problems, such as pet speed/dismissing, soulshard stacking, problems with enslave demon, improved fire/spellstones, ritual of doom fix - but we know that they avoided some more pressing issues.

Similarly, a lot of warrior questions were not addressed:
- Role of a warrior in group pvp, especially protection specced warriors - they have absolutely no purpose and will be obsolete once BG comes out, while a holy specced priest would still be quite welcome.
- Poor 1v1 pvp performance - important in the light of upcoming honor system
- The whole protection tree - you only need about 15 points to get the most benefit out of the tree, and the improvement in tanking over other builds is marginal at best.
- Heavy dependance on the very best gear/weapons, otherwise low survivability,
etc.

While indeed warriors got a slight buff - this mainly pertains to arms warriors, which were already not bad. On the other hand, protection tree warriors (Which were already in need of a buff) actually got a nerf (to sunder armor), and it is more difficult to hold aggro now due to stealth nerf of sunder armor aggro. What is fairly obvious here is that Tyren plays arms/fury warrior and is really unaware of any problems with protection tree or fury since he does not use it at all. Think of it as Eyonix playing a mage. The problem areas of warriors that need help the most get little attention.

It just silly to me that everyone is impressed by the length of Tyrens response, while in reality it contains very little information and pretty much dismisses a lot of legitimate warrior concerns (like the fact that both heroic strike and improved heroic strike talent are absolutely horrible, improved cleave talent is useless, bloodcraze is a waste, and improved block 2/3 are a waste of points, etc). Tyren simply dismissed these as "working as intended". And again, it has been over 2 months since the reply, and nothing at all after that. At least it seems that someone is looking at your class, judging by 6 stickies at the top, latest being only 9 days ago (whether they really are looking is a question to be answered).

Once you get to higher level on your warrior you will experience a lot of these issues (unless you go for mortal strike build and keep up with the best gear, then you might think that warriors are fine).

[Boutros]

The Warrior response was actually written by Kalgan, but it was reposted in the Warrior forum by Tyren. Warriors really don't seem to have any sort of CM advocate, we got one responce directly from the developers saying a couple things would be fixed but most everything else is working as intended, then months of silence.

[russ]

Well the warlocks aren't complaining without a reason. Every patch the problems that they had were not acknowledged and they kept getting nerfs. Sure, you can have fun playing them, but you can have fun playing with a stick - that doesn't make the stick better then a Gameboy.
[right][snapback]73336[/snapback][/right]

A lot of the warlock complaints, however, don't seem to have a good reason. Half of them are about the low intellect of auto-cast, which is a given. The biggest complaint thread in existance specializes in complaining that a) there is no epic warlock mount yet B) they can't mount in combat and c) that they can be knocked off their mount. Oh, and that the strongest pets they get, the ones that take three or four people to kill, are dangerous to use. Oh, and they can't have an infinite supply of their most powerful utility items.

Until the warlock community can get its act together and list viable complaints, even the bugs that need to be fixed will be ignored. Requiring a epic mount for free before listing shadowburn bugs is not a good way to get attention.

[Gurnsey]

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/patchnotes/...h-05-04-06.html

The page was identical to patch notes. Now it contains a smiley face.
[right][snapback]73318[/snapback][/right]

Now superly-duperly official. This page is linked to from the WoW community main page.

Let's hope its time on the Test server works out some of the issues that have been discussed.

[Gurnsey]

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/underdev/

Only mentions the Honor system and new mounts, but so far so good for the leaked notes.
[right][snapback]73316[/snapback][/right]

Here's an interesting bit hiding at the bottom of the patch notes.

"Abilities which do an additional percentage of weapon damage now include attack power as part of the base weapon damage. "

It'll be interesting to see what abilities this affects. If Ambush wasn't including attack power before...ouch.

[Malakar]

As it stands, warlocks have better single target damage...

I think this depends. In my semi-accurate spreadsheet calculations, I was able to push 260 average dps with Shadowbolt. The total dps of all DOTs was around 100. This does not include Curse of Shadows, because I had no information on the % damage increase. Of course it does not include summons either, but there are situations in which the summon will be doing no damage. A fire mage using Fireball/Fireblast did 353dps (323dps with a single 1.5? speed mob attacking you). I know these numbers are off, but they should be pretty close.

Now, in groups you are often going to be limited by the debuff limit, and in solo play you are often going to be limited by your pet's aggro holding ability. But yes, warlock dps is at least comparable to mages, and at best better.

By the way, does anyone know the dps on a lvl 60 succubus?

...better crowd control...

This really depends on the situation. I think they are roughly equal, kind of like an apple and an orange that are about the same size. Fear can be much better than Poly, but it can also be much worse. Seduction is about the same, but is limited to only humanoids and has to be refreshed more frequently.

...comparable AoE...

I disagree here. I think the mage's AOE potential is much better than the warlock's in every way. Rain of Fire's base dps is 113 in the end, not even close to 253 of Arcane Explosion. Hellfire does 208, but also does it to yourself, which makes it very dangerous to be the main AOE'er, and Arcane Explosion is still nearly 25% more dps. And while warlocks have Intensity, 30% chance to interrupt is pretty high when you have 5 things beating on you.

But warlock players who think their class is weak are simply delusional.

Agreed. :)

[Quark]

I'll have to test that some, but Arcane Missles with Curse of Shadows seems to trump Curse of Shadows with Shadowbolts[right][snapback]73422[/snapback][/right]

Isn't a fair comparison, since it's been rare that my Mage has been grouped with a Warlock. Otherwise, Arcane Missles is not sustainable. In groups, I tend to use it only on clearcasts, because it's the most mana-intensive single target spell Mages have.

[Malakar]

AM is not a mage's highest dps spell anyway. Fireball/Fireblast with fire talents is around 20% better than AM/Fireblast with no fire talents, and more mana efficient too. IIRC that was assuming a 1.5 second attack speed mob beating on you. With no mob hitting you it's about 30% higher.

[nobbie]

From the Patch Notes - 4/6/05:

- Warlock Epic Mount quest added. To begin, speak with a demon trainer in any of the capital cities: Kurgal, Martha Strain, Spackle Thornberry, or Jubahl Corpseeker.

*Drool!*

And furthermore:

- The Warlock Infernal quest is now available and can be found in Felwood.
- The Warlock Ritual of Doom quest is now available and can be found in the Tainted Scar.

[Skandranon]

I'll have to test that some, but Arcane Missles with Curse of Shadows seems to trump Curse of Shadows with Shadowbolts, which is how I've been trying to compare the two. 

Except that mages can't cast Curse of Shadows. Or Curse of Elements.

Sure, mage damage is better if there's a warlock in the group. But that can't be the basis for single target damage comparison; not all groups have both mages and warlocks. And if mages are only good when warlocks are around, that just emphasizes how powerful the warlock is.

I don't feel the warlock is a weak class, though my first post would give that impression.  It's all part of my mixing of revoicing and my opinions.
[right][snapback]73422[/snapback][/right]

Yeah, I know. Note that none of my post was specifically directed at you, just those who hold the opinions that you were restating.

[Skandranon]

I think this depends. In my semi-accurate spreadsheet calculations, I was able to push 260 average dps with Shadowbolt. The total dps of all DOTs was around 100. This does not include Curse of Shadows, because I had no information on the % damage increase.

Then all you're saying is that Shadowbolt base damage is inferior to Fireball/Blast base damage, which I can tell by reading the spell statistics. You can't just factor out resistance-lowering curses - they are part of the class abilities.

My observations suggest that negative resistances work in a mirror image of the way positive resistances work, which is unsurprising. In other words, there's a percent chance to take normal damage, a percent chance to take 25% extra damage, a percent chance to take 50% extra damage, and so on. It's not an easy calculation, but the effect is very significant.

This really depends on the situation. I think they are roughly equal, kind of like an apple and an orange that are about the same size. Fear can be much better than Poly, but it can also be much worse. Seduction is about the same, but is limited to only humanoids and has to be refreshed more frequently.

Just start by talking Seduction. It stops one humanoid, much like Polymorph (though you can poly beasts too). Yeah, it needs a faster refresh, but that's not a deal-breaker. When deciding how to apply CC, I've always considered Poly and Seduction to be identical.

Now, after that: say you need to CC another humanoid, or beast, or whatever, really. Fear is there; no cooldown, so you can CC something else as long as the area's mostly clear. Sure, there are lots of situations where you can't fear, but mages get nothing other than Polymorph - even a half-crippled CC like fear is one more than mages get.

Say you run into demons and elementals. Mages throw their hands up in frustration; warlocks have Banish. If there's more than one demon the warlock can Banish one and Enslave another; you only need it to last five minutes, and even the current form does that.

Of course whether CC is good or not depends on the situation. Everything, at its heart, depends on the situation. But we don't say that nothing is better or worse than another because of that. In a general sense, Warlocks can handle a greater variety of enemies and also stop more of them. In the worst case scenario, the only thing a Warlock can do is send the succubus to seduce - generating the same result as a mage doing all he or she can.

I disagree here. I think the mage's AOE potential is much better than the warlock's in every way. Rain of Fire's base dps is 113 in the end, not even close to 253 of Arcane Explosion. Hellfire does 208, but also does it to yourself, which makes it very dangerous to be the main AOE'er, and Arcane Explosion is still nearly 25% more dps. And while warlocks have Intensity, 30% chance to interrupt is pretty high when you have 5 things beating on you.
[right][snapback]73444[/snapback][/right]

The mage's AoE is better, no doubt. But, given the comparable damage, if you can address the drawbacks, warlocks can handle the role of primary AoE just fine. There a lot of ways to do this: have a paladin spam low-aggro heals, or drink a fire protection potion, or pick up a secondary healer.

The damage Hellfire does to the warlock is virtually negligible in a raid situation, where you might have multiple primary and secondary healers. Hellfire's DPS is more than enough to make sure aggro stays on the warlock.

Mage AoE is better. But it's not better enough to compensate for the warlock's superiority in every other area. Warlocks are just better than mages; they can solo more things and they bring more to the table in a group situation. This isn't a call to buff or nerf anything, but even those warlocks who recognize that their class isn't gimped seem to have trouble on this point. "We aren't as good as a mage" is an awfully baseless complaint.

[Drasca]

I remember Drasca had a post talking about warlocks and their complaints, then mentions in the same post how he soloed his way out of some spectacular jam.
[right][snapback]73370[/snapback][/right]

Yes, in *very niche situations* I can shine as demon god. As for downtime, warlocks never had downtime. You overlook, like blizzard, how long and difficult it takes to to solo an elite. They specifically mentioned "skilled players could" take solo elites other classes couldn't and with little downtime. They overlook the uptime it takes. Who else has 5 minute long battles just to solo one monster? Most other battles are concluded in under a minute. That time-demand alone is a deterrent from soloing elites.

What about enemies immune or resistent to fear/charm? i.e. all warriors, most pvp, and all undead? Enemy mobs which are clustered together? Yes, I can solo 3 demons at a time in Dire Maul - east with my 60 Warlock, but at great risk and difficulty to myself, as success is not guaranteed. The phase lasher still kicks my ass.

Warlocks should keep their power in those very niche situations. Mastery over demons and solo-fear are a warlock's strengths. It cannot be used everywhere. It is totally useless in undead, and was of very little pre-patch PvP. It still isn't a defense in PvP. Offensive use? Yes, instant defense? Nope. If a warlock is ambushed in the open, he'll have to stand and fight. There is survival in running without a range advantage.

[Drasca]

I'm sorry Mjdoom, but you're not a warlock on a PvP server, and your assumptions on pvp are simply not true.

Have you ever been Paladin range hammer stunned on the raod? Critically Ambushed by two rogues? Sat down and suddenly stun locked for 2 seconds while being bashed on by combo points by a 60 rogue while only having half a second between stuns to cast anything? Dueled a shadow priest that can instant psychic scream you and your pet (far enough that it disappears all together), dot, mind flay, mana burn, you're at half health and mana, able to cast for two seconds, stunned, and then psychic screamed again, and then mind blasted dead.

In group situations, you are #1 target. Protected? Ha! You're gang-&^$%'ed. Warlocks are considered an easy target. No instant cast defense, Weak snares (talent costly), backloaded damage, many of our dots and abilities are dispellable. Our main 'defense' fear, is highly resistable, or is downright immune by an ever increasing number methods, including battle stances, trinkets, WotF, blacksmithing, shadow resistence, etc. Its also dispellable, as opposed to psychic scream which has no diminishing returns, is not dispellable 'magic', and is instant. Many of our awesome abilities have long and mana costly preperation times. That combined with backloaded damage, and lack of usable instant-escape/snare skills, make warlocks considered "easy targets" in PvP servers. There are warlocks are who are extremely skilled, and do more than their fair share of dishing it out, but this is irrelevant glaring class imbalances in PvP.

Sorry, you haven't 'grown up' on as a horde on pvp server, you don't experience the triumphs and tribulations that really expose the class imbalances.

Oh... on the succubus... she can do about 50 dps fully pimped out. More alongside a warrior with battle shout.


To Skan:

Poly is not equivalent to seduce. Not by a long shot. Poly has a lasts longer, doesn't reduce the player's dps, can be prebuffed (recast on top of itself). Seduce has none of that. You remove the succubus from your damage pool (accetable), and she can be interrupted, and is a lot less reliable because you have that interrupt delay. As it stands now, you could keep an enemy polymorphed nigh-on forever. If you're skilled and lucky enough to have enough time, proper range, and pet not disabled, you *might* be able to charm/fear chain a humanoid enemy.

Comparing Mage and Warlock AoE are both can be extremely effective in PvE, and I'm fine with how it is now pve (I've used hellfire a total of twice in PvP, and it was extremely funny both times.. maybe not so funny to the alliance it burned, but not killed. AE kills). Oh, btw: Warlock AoE dps can be increased with talents to 242 with demonic sacrifice (+15%, heavy talent investment), and Emberstorm might increase that damage a further 10% (again, heavy talent investment, seperate tree). As fire AoE only takes 5% of my playtime, I don't really care to find out. In PvP.. Hellfire is not useable except as a joke or desperate "I'm going to die anyway" measure.