Blood Pact: Meet the minions, part 2 - of voidwalkers and threat
Each week Dominic Hobbs brings you Blood Pact. A journey into the shadowed side of your magical being, taking in all the sights from the dark heart to the withered soul. Where we learn the true price of power.
In the last 'Meet the minions' we looked at how to control your summoned demon and had a good look at the imp. This time we are showcasing the voidwalker and learning what threat is all about. Knowing how to make sure the enemy leaves you alone and hits someone (or something) else is a key ability in the game and the voidwalker is the ideal tool for learning it.
Your voidwalker is a tank. You usher him to the fore and while he keeps your target busy, you destroy them with shadow and flame. I tend to think that the image of a voidwalker is pretty bland, the other demons are much more evocative. Despite this the voidwalker is probably the most evil of minions to use on your enemies. It will reach into their minds and cause such anguish that they will desperately try to beat away this monster. This affords the warlock all the time he needs to safely curse and corrupt their bodies with exquisite slowness and care.
In the last 'Meet the minions' we looked at how to control your summoned demon and had a good look at the imp. This time we are showcasing the voidwalker and learning what threat is all about. Knowing how to make sure the enemy leaves you alone and hits someone (or something) else is a key ability in the game and the voidwalker is the ideal tool for learning it.
Your voidwalker is a tank. You usher him to the fore and while he keeps your target busy, you destroy them with shadow and flame. I tend to think that the image of a voidwalker is pretty bland, the other demons are much more evocative. Despite this the voidwalker is probably the most evil of minions to use on your enemies. It will reach into their minds and cause such anguish that they will desperately try to beat away this monster. This affords the warlock all the time he needs to safely curse and corrupt their bodies with exquisite slowness and care.
You first gain the ability to summon your voidwalker from a quest you can pick up at level ten. The quest giver will be in your home city (unless you're a gnome in which case they're in Stormwind) and will tell you how to learn the spell. The basic form is 'go get this thing,' 'use thing to summon a voidwalker,' 'defeat voidwalker,' 'win.' get this done and you have your very own blue, braceleted bully-boy -- so now you're gonna need to know all about threat.
Threat is a measure of how much a mob wants to attack something, generally you increase your threat on a mob by damaging it. The more threat you have the more they are inclined to attacking you. This is different from aggro which is a binary thing -- you either have it or you don't. You get aggro by engaging a mob (attacking or walking too close to them) or, if someone else has a mob's aggro already, you can take it off them by raising your threat enough so that the mob wants to hit you more then them. This is important stuff for fighting in a group but also fighting with your voidwalker.
For a long time the only way to measure your threat was through addons like KTM and Omen, now there is an inbuilt threat meter. Personally I still prefer Omen as it lets me know the threat levels of my whole group and gives a better idea of how much threat my tank is generating. Whatever tool you use it is important to keep your threat low enough that the tank is the one getting hit and not you. For the default UI, reaching 100% means you will become the mob's target (gain aggro). For Omen 100% of the current target's threat will not mean you take aggro, you need 110% in melee range or 130% if outside it (as you normally will be).
When you first get your voidwalker he will only have the one ability, that's Torment. This will raise his threat level without doing damage. He does do some damage by hitting the mob but not very much, he gets his threat through casting Torment. Once he has started tormenting the mob you can start attacking it. It is worth starting off slowly so your voidy has chance to build up some threat -- remember, you want to keep under the voidwalker's threat level so he keeps aggro. Curse of Agony is a good way to start as it does small amounts of damage to begin with.
Take your voidwalker out and practice, it doesn't matter what mob you go for but find one that is about your level and is alone (we'll come to groups in a moment). Start to get a feel for how much threat each of your spells generate and how much damage you can do without taking aggro from your void. Try leaving him attacking one for a while without doing damage and then do a load all at once. Try seeing what you have to do to take aggro from him. All of this will give you an understanding of how to do the most damage in the least time without being the one getting hit.
If you send your void into a group of two or more mobs then he will gain aggro from them all because he's the first enemy they see; they will all start to attack him. He'll be Tormenting one of them and building up a nice pile of threat with that mob. The other mob (lets assume there are just two) will have his aggro on the voidwalker but won't have any threat level for it. If you do any damage to this mob you will very quickly gain the aggro and he'll come running for you. The same is true if you heal yourself or the voidwalker.
You need to decide if you want to let your voidwalker keep one mob (or more) busy while you kill another one quickly, or have your voidwalker hold onto the aggro of all the mobs while you kill them all slowly. Either strategy is viable but work differently. To get your void to keep aggro on all the mobs you need to make sure he attacks them all by changing his target often and not doing so much damage to any of them that they turn on you. This can be tricky but is a skill worth learning. Being able to apply DoTs such as CoA, Corruption and Immolate make it much easier to spread a little damage across a lot of targets at once. Curse of Weakness can also help by reducing the damage the void takes and therefore any healing he might need.
As you and your voidwalker grow up he will learn new abilities. Suffering works in a similar way to Torment except it gains him more threat and does so with every mob within 10 yards of him. However, he can only cast it every 2 minutes as opposed to every 5 seconds for Torment, so use it at the right time.
Consume Shadows can only be used outside of combat and you have to tell him to do it. This will heal him up and mean that you (and close party members) can better see stealthed enemies. This can be handy in PvP but the voidwalker still isn't much of a PvP minion.
Sacrifice originally killed the voidwalker for a personal shield; this was changed to only take a portion of the voidwalker's health. What you get is a nice bubble around you that will absorb a load of damage and stop your spells being slowed down. This is great if you have your voidwalker tanking something and then you accidentally take aggro, it lets you either quickly finish off the mob, or heal up the void while he torments the mob back off you.
The voidwalker is seen as the ideal tool for levelling with good reason. Once you reach level 14 you have Health Funnel, Drain Life and of course your voidwalker. This turns you and your minion into a rounded group. You cover off the tanking, the healing and the damage dealing. If you chose the right talent build you can make your voidwalker extremely tough and effective -- so much so that many group quests that call for you to find a dedicated tanking player can be soloed by a warlock with a voidwalker.
Don't be fooled into thinking that your voidwalker is as good as a player tank though. A player would have to be very bad to not generate more threat than your voidwalker. While he has high armor and deep health pool he can't dodge, parry or block attacks. Avoidance does mitigate most AoE damage but you don't get that until level 60. You might have heard of voidwalkers tanking raid bosses and this is true -- I used my void to tank Sartharion with 2 and 3 drakes -- but this fight is the exception. The only reason this worked is because Sarth does a lot of AoE damage (Flame Breath) and the raid doesn't attack him first, they are busy with the drakes. This means that damage incoming is managable and the void only needs to out-threat his healers.
Blizzard weren't happy with this use of a voidwalker and so they implemented nerfs to both his health pool and threat generation which made void-tanking of Sartharion much harder. While I agree that void tanking may put a tank out of a raid position I don't think the health/threat nerf was the right way to resolve the issue. The health nerf meant that the void now has the same health as the felguard and even succubus. This means that if you can summon a felguard then you have no good reason to summon a voidwalker ever again, he'll do a better job in almost every case (except the Sacrifice bubble). I would rather they had made Sarth's breath ignore Avoidance or the like. Threat generation did need a nerf (at one stage they could take aggro from a good tank that was really trying) but again, I feel this was too harsh and now the void doesn't generate all that much threat so you have to be very careful with your damage.
All that said, the voidwalker is an excellent minion for levelling and soloing. Along with the imp the voidwalker is one of the strongest symbols of a warlock. He's instantly recognisable immensely useful. He's also the hottest topic for discussions about having new demon models in future expansions. The Burning Crusade in particular saw a lot of new voidwalker skins enter the game and a lot of locks would like to see these make it to the summoned voids. I've not heard anything about this for Cataclysm but I wouldn't be surprised if it crept in there.
Blood Pact is a weekly column detailing DoTs, demons, and all the dastardly deeds done by Warlocks. If you're curious about what's new with Locks since the last patch, check out the Patch 3.2 Warlock Guide or find out what's upcoming in Cataclysm from the BlizzCon 2009: Class Discussion Panel.
Filed under: Warlock, Analysis / Opinion, How-tos, Leveling, Guides, (Warlock) Blood Pact
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Refill Nov 9th 2009 9:05PM
"Blizzard weren't happy with..." I laughed
WTB authors reviewing work :D
Shrike Nov 9th 2009 9:23PM
In some forms of English, such as that spoken by, well, the English... "Blizzard" is a collective noun which implies "those at Blizzard", and it would thus use "weren't".
As proof that this was the intended usage, see the rest of the sentence (emphasis mine): "Blizzard weren't happy with this use of a voidwalker and so THEY".
mike Nov 9th 2009 9:28PM
Shrike beat me to it, but yea the author is using Blizzard as a collective noun.
Dboy Nov 9th 2009 10:04PM
Shrike is right, however this: "A player would have to be very bad to not generate more threat then your voidwalker" doesn't make any sense.
"Then" means subsequently or soon afterward. "A player would have to be very bad to not generate more threat subsequently your voidwalker" doesn't make any sense. I think the word you're looking for is "than", which is a comparison word.
danglewood Nov 9th 2009 10:10PM
That Blizzard is a collective noun is a given. But just because it's a collective noun doesn't mean that it's automatically plural. Because he's not talking about individual devs of Blizzard, but the group as a whole, Blizzard is singular. If the sentence read, "Some at Blizzard weren't happy..." or "Blizzards devs weren't happy..." then the plural would be correct, as would be the plural pronoun. You wouldn't say, 'McDonalds are the largest restaurant chain in the world, because they have great hamburgers."
Zyko Nov 9th 2009 10:23PM
Yeah, I don't know about every one else, but the improper use of they and then makes this otherwise excellent article impossible for me to read. Change this or risk inducing my wrath. That is all.
(sarcasm)
Dboy Nov 9th 2009 11:03PM
@ Zyko
That's fine for you mate, but for the rest of the world, a person's command of the English language affects the way in which their ideas are received.
You cant getaway wit usin bad speling and sentense structcha and grammer if you won't pplz 2 tayk youse all seriously. Just arks anyone.
Dboy Nov 9th 2009 11:59PM
I work in the education sector, and I am constantly trying to justify the modern generation's use of technology to my peers. I am trying to convince my fellow colleagues that the increased use of technology does not have an overall negative effect on our generation's language skills. Sometimes I feel like I'm fighting a losing battle.
I don't understand why people are downgrading the grammar corrections above. I sincerely hope that we, as a technology savvy people, have not developed such a disdain for effective communication because we are lazy. Why is it that we hold such contempt for someone who cannot remove themselves from a pixelated fire on an imaginary in-game floor, but we defend another person who is too slack to learn the difference between "than" and "then"?
Stridez Nov 10th 2009 12:18AM
@Dboy
I can't speak on behalf of everyone who downvoted you. But I personally downvoted you because, while I agreed with your points otherwise, you came across as an obnoxious, smarmy git when you pointed out the author's 'than/than' typo, as you accused him of being "too slack to learn the difference." I suspect if you better understood the concept of a typo, you would not automatically assume any erroneous typing was intended as such.
While the poor spelling and grammar you speak of is one of my pet peeves as well, there is a very marked difference between poor understanding of these things and occasional flaws in their execution. From the high mastery of the English language the author displays in his posts, it should be clear to you that what occurred was a typo.
What I find far more annoying though is comments like the first poster's, who try to correct perfectly fine spelling and grammar. If you don't know what you're talking about, please shut up. You just look like an idiot.
Dboy Nov 10th 2009 12:33AM
Excellent reply - thanks Stridez.
If I have come across as a smarmy git, I apologise. My tone was probably born out of the frustration that an English teacher feels when s/he has corrected the same mistake in four hundred pieces of students' work over the year. My later comments were worded strongly for effect, rather than derision.
It's interesting you mention the 'high mastery' of the English language in the author's posts - I would agree! I do, however, have students that have an excellent vocabulary but still do not know how to use a possessive apostrophe (no matter how many times I tutor them or point it out). There are gaps in all our knowledge, I am sure, and from my experience the 'than/then' substitution is, in almost all circumstances, a spelling error rather than a simple typo (in all the pieces of work I've marked, a student who misuses 'than/then' does it consistently throughout their piece, regardless of their overall expression and intelligence).
Jehanne Nov 10th 2009 1:17AM
@Dboy
Some historical perceptive should make you feel a little better. I'm an aspiring Renaissance scholar and spend most of my time reading texts where spelling is a matter of personal choice and written punctuation had barely begun to separate itself from the rules of classical rhetoric concerning oratory. Of course, print and the fixation of scholars during the 18th Century to standardize the King's English has led to the point where we can argue about the proper use of a pronoun or where to place an apostrophe. Still, it's all arbitrary in many ways. There is a communal agreement on certain rules of language, but most of the history of English has involved the creative bending or flat out ignoring of those 'rules' to generate new and striking meaning. Milton, Shakespeare, and Spenser played with spelling to create more effective puns, or left out apostrophes so the reader was left wondering if a word is possessive or plural.
While I completely understand your frustrations (I've taught college composition) I'm not that afraid for the language itself. Its rules evolve and change; its riotousness is what gives it life, and that's why it will survive and grow no matter what technological changes occur. Buck up!
Kira Nov 10th 2009 7:23AM
Personally I consider "effective communication" to be I communicate something, and the person I'm communicating it to, understands. Anything beyond that is rather pointless unless your trying to make yourself look better than someone else, which in my eyes just makes you a jerk with an education degree.
WTB my crazy Grade 12 english teacher who would go off on rants about throwing frozen cats...
Celess Jan 26th 2010 4:19AM
@Jehanne
Whilst I agree with the general post, there was one glaring error:
"Milton, Shakespeare, and Spenser played with spelling to create more effective puns, or left out apostrophes so the reader was left wondering if a word is possessive or plural."
Firstly, Shakespeare was never meant to be read; so much in fact that each actor was only given his lines, not anybody elses. Couple this with the fact that many of the actors added their own lines and soliloquies (the more lines you had, the more important you were deemed - so often they 'bigged up' their own part) and that the manuscripts we have are not originals but in fact are sourced from people who would stand in the crowd and write down what they were hearing (yes, really), then it's inevitable that the enigma of deducing if a word was possessive or plural would arise. Simply, we will never know exactly what the original scripts and intents contained.
Also, Milton, Spenser and Shakespeare were both before the standardization, as such, they were free to ignore apostrophes and grammar in general as they saw fit.
I agree with both also: the idea that language must change with the times, and that rules must be enforced. Truth is, the English language breaks it's own rules frequently, more than most languages, usually for little more than convenience or simple memetic linguistics.
Consider: If shown to a person to whom English is not the mother tongue, and also to an English National, the flaw in the following sentence is more likely to be spotted by the person to whom English is a secondary language:
"I cannot decide whether I should go to the cinema."
In fact, many English people don't know what's wrong with this... but to be fair, why -should- it matter? We know what's meant by the sentence, but perhaps the additional clarity is a boon. I would that we lived in a world based more on clarity than implied intent.
Rai Nov 9th 2009 9:45PM
I personally think that if you are able to pull it off, a voidwalker would make an acceptable substitute for some of the tanks out there...
Also, I have to agree with the comment about Blizzard nerfing the voidwalker to stop it tanking Sarth. They could have handled that in a much better fashion.
Is Sacrifice's shield as powerful as it used to be?
nekorion Nov 9th 2009 10:32PM
It's every bit as powerful, and its far more useful. The change literally did not tweak the power of the shield, it just made it so the voidwalker took a bit of damage instead of killing it.
themightysven Nov 9th 2009 10:20PM
Also of note (maybe) Voidwalkers (like all Demons in WoW) are aliens (like the draenei and worgen) but unlike the other demons, voidwalkers are not represented in the Burning Legion. (there are some in outland, but that's because outland is falling apart) Thus making them free-agents (possibly related to the Naaru) and explaining their oh-so reluctant servitude.
"Send me back"
Celess Jan 26th 2010 4:21AM
Voidwalkers indeed are not a part of the Burning Legion. They are merely entities that happen to reside within the Twisting Nether and share much of their home with the Burning Legion.
I kinda like to think of it that Voidwalkers are Elementals of Shadow and Void... >.>
Hoggersbud Nov 9th 2009 10:30PM
Funny, I've always thought that Voidwalkers had more character than the other demons. Just a bit more subtle in how they show it.
The Imp? It's serving you as a part of a bargain. The Succubus? She's there to seduce you. The Felguard? He's hanging around to show his contempt for you. Ok, so I can't think of anything to describe the Felhound, but anyway the voidwalker, he's been coerced into being there.
And he doesn't like it. That always struck me as quite meaningful.
Maybe that was because the first time I heard one speak I was in Blackrock depths, and it said "I don't like this place." which has just stuck with me.
duffry Nov 10th 2009 6:28AM
After many wipes on Sarth 3D this phrase took on new meaning; it's now my favourite one.
Nipah Nov 10th 2009 4:44PM
I was on the boat between Booty Bay and Ratchet when an Alliance Warlock summoned his imp... now, I've played a Warlock before on two occassions, and I know full well how annoyed the demons they summon are... but I didn't realize that other people could hear what they were saying...
So as he's ripping this little demon through whatever hole between the two worlds they both live in, I hear "You know, we've had a lot of fun together, it's been really special, but I think it's time I should start seeing other warlocks. Just a little on the side. No no no it's not you, it's not you, it's me. I just need my space, it's nobody's fault."
Man... it was almost enough to make me want to play my Warlock again...