2e Priest Spell - Imbue with Spell Ability

[u/Psychological_Fact13]

The above mentioned spell - Imbue with Spell Ability has a restriction "Only priest spells of an informational or defensive nature or a cure light wounds spell can be transferred".

A player has asked about the spell 2nd level spell "Draw Upon Holy Might" from the Tome of Magic (pg 58). It allows the caster to raise one stat (Str/Dex/Con) +1/3 levels.

The player is "arguing" that an increase in Dex/Con IS defensive (and I kind of agree), but there is the Str. That is NOT defensive in my mind.

Would you just say that spell does NOT qualify for transfer using Imbue with Spell Ability OR that it can't be used to raise Str?

How would you or HAVE you ruled this one

[u/DeltaDemon1313]

It's your call. I categorize it as Defensive/Offensive so technically, no. It can be used to inflict extra damage. In the end though the limitation are controlled by the Deity who is granting the power/spell. Is imbuing someone with a spell going to further the cause of the Deity who is granting this spell? If yes, then the spell is legal. If no, then the spell is not legal. Same thing with casting any spell. It only works if the Deity deems it should work. It's not like Arcane magic. So, like I said, it's your call because you are the Deity.

[u/BReligion- → u/DeltaDemon1313]

I was just typing the same basic response! Except I would say sure go a head… but remember… if said spell usage goes against the Deity who granted the spell maybe a few to many times (what you find is pc abuse of your good nature), then maybe said Deity is not impressed and the priest may get a time out or need to repent a little to get back into the good graces.

[u/Searscale]

Spells that don't cause injury or saves to avoid them are defensive.

Haste is defensive. Fireball is not.

Draw upon Holy Might is defensive. Phantasmal Killer is not.

Augment spells fall under the category of utility/defensive. The weapon you swing WHILE imbued is the offensive aspect of the situation.

[u/PossibleCommon0743]

Definitely not. Just because a spell could give some damage prevention benefits doesn't mean it's a defensive spell. A defensive spell is one designed specifically for defense.

Going down that slippery slope ends with "well, if they're dead they can't attack me. So Fireball is a defensive spell, right?"

[u/BcDed]

My assumption is the no offense limitation is mostly to prevent alpha strike nukes. A small passive damage buff I would just allow as I don't think it would really cause any issue. In fact I think that is a suboptimal choice for the spell and something more directly impactful would be more powerful, but players like making their numbers go up.

[u/milesunderground → u/BcDed]

My suspicion is that very early on, someone tried to send a henchmen ahead into an encounter with a Flame Strike loaded and the DM had to out their footing down.

[u/new2bay → u/milesunderground]

You might be right, although your exact example is unlikely to have been the case. Imbue with Spell Ability in 2e only allows the transfer of a maximum of 2 first level spells and 1 second level spell. Flame Strike is a 5th level spell.

[u/Haunting-Contract761]

Seems a good creative use which enemies can use to good effect as well - orc shaman assisting ogres or giants - thieves guild with links to dodgy sects etc… I would allow for sure

[u/ANGRYGOLEMGAMES]

Everything that can cause direct damage or requires a saving throw to avoid a condition is offensive, everything else is fine for Imbue with Spell Ability.