AuraSeer said:
You're right, it's not about semantics. Why are you trying to make it that way?
The obvious intent of that line is to prevent ray of enfeeblement from disabling opponents. The spell inflicts a Strength penalty, but cannot make an opponent helpless. That's all it does.
Turning RoE into a protection spell requires a torturous semantic reading of the description's wording. Claiming that to be "common sense" is disingenuous, if not blatant trolling.
What's "trolling" is not reading the entire thread (or reading it, and not paying attention), and then jumping on someone because you're confused and have the sides of the argument reversed...
Mr. Short and Blue here is the one arguing the spell is "in the nature of an immunity".