Bloodlord's Embrace Mechs Question

Akylles

Hello ESOers,

I'm dinkin around with a magicka templar tank build, and I have been playing with Bloodlord's Embrace for the heck of it. But there's something that is a little confusing for me with respect to the mechs of the Blood Curse. I am wondering if people know whether a second bash to a target that already has Blood Curse on them actually does anything. In the tooltip it says "dealing additional Bash damage moves the Blood Curse". So, does this mean that bashing the same enemy twice moves it to a new mob nearby? Does it remove the Curse, so you can like apply and deactivate it based on bashing? Does it do nothing, as the enemy is already cursed so it just acts as like a reinforcement of the debuff sort of thing?

I am using S'rendarr addon to track buffs, etc., and when I do a double bash, the debuff is removed from my list. Thus, I'm having a little trouble parsing out what's happening specifically to Blood Curse. The issue only really arises when I have placed the Blood Curse on a boss, but then need to bash the boss again in order to interrupt a particular mech for the fight. Regardless of bashing to reapply the Curse, I won't see it again in the debuff list, and because of the amount of stuff going on in combat when I'm tanking, I can't really tell if I'm still regenerating magicka from blocking with Blood Curse active, or if it's just my magicka recovery.

Any illuminating info into what's happening with Blood Curse kinda "behind the scenes" would be much appreciated! If anyone has done any testing, etc., that's be amazing.

P.S. this is not a thread to discuss the viability of Bloodlord's Embrace, or magicka tanking, or templar tanking, etc., so don't derail my question, please. This is strictly asking about any info anyone might have (not just gut feelings or rumours, but real knowledge please) regarding the exact way(s) in which Blood Curse operates, mechanically speaking.

Thank you in advance to anyone who can help shed some light here!

Akylles

Akylles wrote: »

I am using S'rendarr addon to track buffs, etc., and when I do a double bash, the debuff is removed from my list.

Sorry, I should've elucidated this a bit better. I mean that if I double bash (use a bash on a target that already has the Blood Curse), the debuff is removed from my list; AND, if I bash again (no matter how much), the Blood Curse debuff is removed from the list.

Most of the time, my attention is divided amongst a bunch of different things, so I can't really tell if blocking is still regenerating magicka from the Blood Curse (or just my magicka recovery). I'm left with wondering if the Blood Curse is totally deactivated, if S'rendarr just has a bit of a glitch on double bashes with Bloodlord's Embrace, or if there's something going on mechanics-wise for this Mythic that I'm not understanding.

Akylles

AND, if I bash again (no matter how much), the Blood Curse debuff is removed from the list.

I'm so bad at this, sorry! I meant that, once the debuff has been removed from the list, I don't see it get added back even after subsequent bashes that should have reapplied the Blood Curse even if it was removed (unless once removed, the mech is that it doesn't get reapplied to the same mob again in the same combat?).

The damn thing is just weird and muddy in terms of how it operates after the initial bash that places the curse! bah! somebody help heheheh

PeacefulAnarchy

This easy to test:
Equip Bloodlord's Embrace
Equip an Ice Staff, put points in trifocus passive. Now blocking costs magika, and therefore stops mag regen.
Mag dump and block. Mag is now low and not changing.
Go to an enemy that doesn't hit too hard or often and bash.
Let it hit you. See mag increase in fixed amounts each time you are hit.
Bash again.

Result:
The blood curse visual effect is removed, but the actual blood curse remains active. I still see the negative effect icon on the UI, though. Bashing again reenables the blood curse visual effect.

At all numbers of bashing the blood curse remains and works as advertised.

Akylles

Oh wow, thank you so much! That's a smart way to do it, and I really appreciate the information about the visual effect removal but the underlying effect stability.