Are reserve feats over-powered?

[Jay R]

My DM believes that reserve feats are overpowered, by giving a basically infinite number of spells.

I have no clear argument, and I think I sort of agree. From original D&D on, Magic-Users / wizards have had the strongest powers, but a strictly limited number of them. This takes away the limitation.

I'd like to hear the arguments on both sides. I'm not interested in a final answer. We are never all going to agree, and that's all right. So please offer me your opinions and observations.

I'm perfectly willing to see critiques of each other's opinions. But that's not so we can reach a consensus. We can't. It so I can read all the thought processes that lead to each different conclusion.

In essence, I'm not consulting a hive mind. [The hive mind is an illusion. There is no hive mind.] I'm sampling as many different individual minds as possible.

[TalonOfAnathrax]

"wizards have had the strongest powers, but a strictly limited number of them"
This is true. However Reserve Feats don't actually match any of these powers. Using a Reserve Feat in combat means deciding not to use your awesome magical powers and powerful spells, and instead use a weak but reliable effect much like a martial PC swinging their sword.
Reserve Feats are terrible when compared to the impressive spells Tier 1 casters can use, and it's important to remember that. The one possible exception is Minor Shapeshift - but even then, keeping a Polymorph spell unused to trade swift actions for temp HP is still less broken than actually casting a Polymorph spell. All the combat feats have ridiculously low damage, range, and have far fewer attacks per round than martial PCs. The non-combat feats do things like "give infinite weakened Detect Magic cantrips" (which is more easily done with cheap magic items instead of expensive feats) or "give infinite Disgusie Self but with a duration so low that it's almost unusable". Let's not even talk about the ones that force a low DC check to avoid minor debuffs, or the ones that can be replicated by a Rogue with Sleight of Hand.

I consider Reserve Feats a fluffy but low-powered option. Calling them broken is completely missing the point of why Wizards and Clerics are broken.

[Troacctid]

The short answer is no.

The long answer is no, they're not overpowered, but they're pretty good! I think as a group, they're in the top 25% of caster feats. But most of them will rarely be seen on high-op characters because, well, they're like training wheels for players who aren't good at the resource management minigame. Reserve feats can make casters a lot easier to play (especially prepared casters), and they are definitely an improvement for any character who does take them—however, they cost a feat slot! And I would say that cost, paying a feat...that's definitely a fair cost for the benefit they give. So, they're good, and they're strong, but they're also well within the bounds of reason and should not be breaking anything.


I consider Reserve Feats a fluffy but low-powered option.
See, this is swinging too far in the other direction. Reserve feats are good and useful feats that give you extra abilities and boost your caster level, and the fact that they do both is 😙👌.

[Thurbane]

Some DMs have a real issue with "all day" special abilities. I think it's a bit of an old school POV. First time I played a Dragon Shaman, for instance, the DM thought it was ridiculously OP that I could breathe a breath weapon for 3d6 damage every 1d4 rounds! The first Warlock character in the group was treated with even greater incredulity.

Reserve Feats really are not overpowered. They just add some longevity to the adventuring day for casters.

[Zanos]

Nah. A really good casters primary contribution isn't damage, and a damaging spell usually inflicts twice the damage or more of a reserve feat, and in a much larger area. Keeping a fireball in reserve for firery burst for example; using the spell deals 5d6 damage in a 20ft radius in a 600 foot range. Using the reserve feat is 3d6 damage in a 5ft area in a 30ft range. This ratio gets much worse as you level up since spell power doesn't really scale linearly, and caster level and spells buffs become more accessible, while very few things can buff up reserve feats. Very few high level characters will have reserve feats because you will have more spell splots than combat actions in a day.

That said, at low levels, in combat heavy games, they're not terrible options. They are very good at giving spellcasters something to do with their round other than fire a crossbow with some marginal chance to hit for very little damage. Minor shapeshift and summon elemental are some of the standout options that don't deal damage. Minor shapeshift effectively can grant you THP equal to your HD every turn, very good for a gish or for adding durablity to a caster. Summon Elemental is terrible at combat when you get it but a disposable small elemental provides some utility.

[Kurald Galain]

My DM believes that reserve feats are overpowered, by giving a basically infinite number of spells.

That is incorrect.

Except at low levels, casters have way more spells per day than there are rounds of combat in a day. So increasing the amount of spells per day, even by an infinite amount, largely doesn't affect their power level.

Increasing their highest, or second-highest spell slots per day would help, of course. But reserve feats don't actually do that.

It is fairly rare for a reserve feat to be worth the standard action in combat, except against enemies who aren't really a threat anyway. Hence, the feats are not OP.

[Troacctid]

Nah. A really good casters primary contribution isn't damage, and a damaging spell usually inflicts twice the damage or more of a reserve feat, and in a much larger area. Keeping a fireball in reserve for firery burst for example; using the spell deals 5d6 damage in a 20ft radius in a 600 foot range. Using the reserve feat is 3d6 damage in a 5ft area in a 30ft range. This ratio gets much worse as you level up since spell power doesn't really scale linearly, and caster level and spells buffs become more accessible, while very few things can buff up reserve feats. Very few high level characters will have reserve feats because you will have more spell splots than combat actions in a day.
Fiery Burst gives +1 CL, so it would be 6d6. The ability to also boost the damage of the "real" spells is one of the big upsides of the damage-dealing reserve feats.

[Ramza00]

So reserve feats have a save dc of 10 + ability mod + level of the spell
but they are replicating spells that are 1/2 to 1/3rd of what you would be able to do at that level.

For example a CL 5 3rd level Fireball does 5d6 damage with long range and affects 44 squares if we are using 5 by 5 grids and not hexes
A Fiery Burst Reserve Feat powered by the above spell is 3d6 with 30 ft range and affects 4 squares. That is similar to a 1st level spell but the save dc.

You also get a cl bonus of +1 that is very useful or completely useless, that fireball does an extra 3.5 damage on average +1 to +6 depending on the d6 roll (6d6 total at HD 5)

-----

So in theory they could be unbalanced but all the reserve feats besides minor shapeshift (temp hp as a swift action), and holy warrior (passive extra damage for war domain clerics) are not worth the action being used. They are beneficial if you are fighting hordes of creatures that are too weak to hurt you unless you are fighting hordes of them. Aka zerglings stink unless you are fighting 100 or 200 of them.

[Zaq]

A wizard spending a turn on Fiery Burst is a wizard who isn't spending a turn on glitterdust or slow or polymorph or wall of stone.

[Jack_Simth]

My DM believes that reserve feats are overpowered, by giving a basically infinite number of spells.

I have no clear argument, and I think I sort of agree. From original D&D on, Magic-Users / wizards have had the strongest powers, but a strictly limited number of them. This takes away the limitation.

I'd like to hear the arguments on both sides. I'm not interested in a final answer. We are never all going to agree, and that's all right. So please offer me your opinions and observations.

I'm perfectly willing to see critiques of each other's opinions. But that's not so we can reach a consensus. We can't. It so I can read all the thought processes that lead to each different conclusion.

In essence, I'm not consulting a hive mind. [The hive mind is an illusion. There is no hive mind.] I'm sampling as many different individual minds as possible.

They enable some interesting tricks and some cross-role methods... but there's plenty of other ways of doing the same thing. Feats are a very valuable build resource, and it's usually the action economy that matters more than the slot economy. You might use Dimensional Jaunt to teleport out of a grapple or out of AoO range... but it's a standard action, while something like Anklets of Teleportation (2/day swift action 10 feet), Boots of Swift Passage (5/day move action, 20 feet), or a Shadow Cloak (3/day Immediate action, ten feet) are MUCH better choices for actual combat - and you can get them via Craft Wondrous Item (one of the better feats in the game for a full caster) and a little gold and XP.

When it comes to the direct-offense reserve feats? Eh. They're OK for bypassing golem immunities (being Su), but actual spells do it better - Conjouration(Creation) such as the Orb line, Grease, Glitterdust, Wall of Stone, Wall of Iron, et cetera; Illusion spells like Silent Image or Illusory Wall; Conjouration(Summoning) spells to get spare bodies for distraction; et cetera.

Most reserve feats are useful primarily in two types of scenarios:
1) Out of combat
2) Grinder runs of way too many low-level opponents

Out of combat:
A Wizard who needs to fill in as a trapsmith, for instance, might take Acidic Splatter and Summon Elemental. Cast Detect Magic or Arcane Sight and then Permanancy it to spot magical traps, then send a horde of elementals (one at a time) through areas to clear them of mechanical traps. Locks are dissolved.

They're good for "grinder runs" where you end up facing a massive quantity of low-CR opponents that the party Fighter can put down... but again, there's spells or items that generally do it better. Wands or simple long-duration buffs will likely carry the Wizard well enough.

Most Reserve feats simply aren't worth it.

There are a few that are reasonable choices, though:
Minor Shapeshift gives a few options - the most notable of which is the Temp HP. As a swift action that lasts a few rounds if you don't use it up, it's a decent choice for defense.
Summon Elemental goes well with invisibility - an Air Elemental can Charge from a fair distance away, and combining the two lets you BE the "grinder run". It's also good for non-combat healing if you've got a weapon in the party with the Vampiric weapon quality (Magic Item Compendium).

Even at that, though, they're not really gamebreakers, and there's other ways to do it, and better (take a look at the Bowl of Summoning Water Elementals - and add a Decanter of Endless Water)

So... no, not broken.

[Elkad]

An imp accomplishes more than a reserve fireball, and also costs a feat. Because it can do something nearly every round, even if it's just shooting a longbow for 1d4. Plus scout and fetch and fly and give potions to the unconscious barbarian.

And that's not even the best option.

[Segev]

What Reserve Feats seem to do, from my perspective, is let casters "be magical" casually. It's like PF and 5e's at-will cantrips: you can do a minor effect regularly, even just for fluff or fun. It's not going to be nearly as powerful as actually casting a leveled spell from a spell slot, and so you're not going to do it in a serious fight.

[Anthrowhale]

I consider them not-overpowered-but-solid as well.

Holy Warrior is another interesting one for some builds. It's Craven/2 for damage, but with none of sneak attack's limitations.

[Necroticplague]

Hahaha-no. Reserve feats are vastly weaker than spells, so that's not really much of a comparison. They're often a bit situational, but overall handy and useful, and not particularly powerful.

[weckar]

I actually swing a bit the opposite way of the rest of the thread. I think Reserve spells are quite good at what they do. Specifically, it allows you to specialize your spell preparation more while leaving you with an answer when it turns out you prepared for the wrong situation. They mostly pay off at low-to-mid levels (4-10 or so), but during that time they can really put in work.

The argument of 'you have more spell slots than actions anyway' generally does not hold if the spells you have prepared do not apply to the current situation. A small blast of fire, available effectively at will, almost always applies.

[Kurald Galain]

if the spells you have prepared do not apply to the current situation

...then you need to work on your spell selection :smallamused:

[Xervous]

Reserve feats don’t bring much in the way of excessive numeric throughput or plot arc short circuiting. Short of using alternate resting and recovery rules that penalize casters you’ll need some degree of shenanigans to have Martials running at full hp even when the casters would be kept running on ‘infinite spells’ by reserve feats.

They shouldn’t worry you any more than a flying, pouncing barbarian getting a backup ranged weapon.

[Telonius]

Some DMs have a real issue with "all day" special abilities. I think it's a bit of an old school POV. First time I played a Dragon Shaman, for instance, the DM thought it was ridiculously OP that I could breathe a breath weapon for 3d6 damage every 1d4 rounds! The first Warlock character in the group was treated with even greater incredulity.

Reserve Feats really are not overpowered. They just add some longevity to the adventuring day for casters.

Yeah, Eldritch Blast damage is a pretty good comparison. Reserve Feats are for when a Wizard's fighting a bunch of mooks, wants to feel useful, and doesn't want to waste their better spells on Dire Rat #4. It's a step up from firing a Crossbow Bolt, but not earth-shattering (compared to what an equivalent-level spell could do).

[The_Jette]

My DM believes that reserve feats are overpowered, by giving a basically infinite number of spells.

I have no clear argument, and I think I sort of agree. From original D&D on, Magic-Users / wizards have had the strongest powers, but a strictly limited number of them. This takes away the limitation.

I'd like to hear the arguments on both sides. I'm not interested in a final answer. We are never all going to agree, and that's all right. So please offer me your opinions and observations.

I'm perfectly willing to see critiques of each other's opinions. But that's not so we can reach a consensus. We can't. It so I can read all the thought processes that lead to each different conclusion.

In essence, I'm not consulting a hive mind. [The hive mind is an illusion. There is no hive mind.] I'm sampling as many different individual minds as possible.

When Reserve Feats were first introduced I was playing with a very old school DM who thought that everything was overpowered. A friend of mine once built an improvised weapon master and used nothing but spoons as his weapons just to get him to proclaim that spoons are OP. He did it. So, obviously, he thought that Reserve Feats were OP, too. If you pay attention in actual gameplay, though, you'll find that they're not especially powerful. They really just give your spell caster something to do on a round when you would otherwise have done something minor, like throw a dart. It's comparable to gaining Martial Weapon Prof (Longbow). So, not OP.

[noob]

...then you need to work on your spell selection :smallamused:

There is a lot of situations where just sitting and drinking tea while the things sorts themselves is the right action to do.
Some people wants to instead "do something" and picks up reserve feats.

[Khedrac]

I think it fair to say "it depends on the reserve feat".

A notable example of a weak reserev feat is "fiery blast", but then raw DPS is always a weak option for a caster - sometimes it works, but there's almost always somethign better.

A middle option is "touch of healing" - the ability to bring the entire party up to half health without expending any spells or item charges can be very useful (akin to the dragon shaman aura).

A strong option is "mitigate suffering" where the ability is considerably stronger than the required spell (lesser restoration). If the party has just lost a large number of stat points (e.g. from fighting a bunch of shadows without turn undead) then the ability to supply any number of abilitiy points (up to normal scores) for 10 minutes is far stronger than healing 1d4 points.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

In a low-mid level game heavy on combat and attrition and not too high-op - such as a typical dungeon crawl game not centered around the 15 minute adventuring day - Fiery Burst can be a decent feat. In these sort of games you usually want to get 1 big spell out for the combat and then let the mooks your teammates mop up from there. It's useful, if not game-breaking, to have a more effective at-will action during those mop-up rounds. And Fiery Burst will definitely be more effective than pulling out a weapon, for a typical caster.

Some are saying that by the time the wizard is running out of spells, the fighter is running out of HP. Beyond 3rd level or so, this is just not true due to wands of Lesser Vigor. It is true that when your level is high enough you could be casting a combat spell every round and basically never run out. What the reserve feat does in this case is replace the low level combat spells (which may be fading in effectiveness) with an all-day so-so option, allowing those spell slots to be filled with situational stuff and utility instead.

I do agree that they're never really over-powered, though, outside of possibly Summon Elemental in a low-op trap-heavy game.

[Kurald Galain]

There is a lot of situations where just sitting and drinking tea while the things sorts themselves is the right action to do.
Some people wants to instead "do something" and picks up reserve feats.

Indeed they do.

And that makes those feats by definition not overpowered, which is what this thread is about.

[Zancloufer]

Feats are a far, far, more valuable resource than spell slots at just about every level of play. Combine that with action economy and IMHO your not going to be using 90% of reserve feats in combat. If anything I would say about half the reserve feats are underpowered.

Basically there are two benefits and two costs associated with each reserve feat. First you gain +1 competence bonus to CL for a specific type of spell. Nice but maybe not worth it on it's own. The second is the ability to cast a single "spell at will". By spell I mean a half power spell, and at will, only as long as you have a spell of that type unused. Probably better than 50% of Fighter feast but that's more an issue with many mundane feats sucking not reserve feats being really all that powerful.

I also like to house rule infinite cantrips like PF even in 3.5, so that might colour my opinion on at will's being not OP that much.

[newguydude1]

tell your dm to playtest it before whining about it.

i got fiery burst.
hell of a lot of monsters are immune to fire
2d6 is an average of 7 damage a turn
reflex for half and its super easy to hit taht save and it does 3 damage on average.
zomg!!!! 3 damage a round every round is so op!!!!!! even when half the monsters are immune to it!!!!!

reserve feats are such suboptimal trash i feel like a total noob whenever i pick it up because it shows just how clueless i am with my current wizard build to pick these worthless trash up.

so... anyways. your dms whining is a blessing in disguise. reserve feats are trap options so by your dms whining you managed to avoid falling into a trap as well.


I'd like to hear the arguments on both sides. I'm not interested in a final answer. We are never all going to agree, and that's all right. So please offer me your opinions and observations.

nah, we all agree that reserve feats are trash and the only reason youd ever pick one up is if you want the +1 caster level for some reason.

the sole exception might be minor shapeshift iunno. swift actions are super important at the level i play at.

edit: if were talking outside combat then summon elemental is actually worth picking up. earth elemental triggering every trap, burrowing through every wall, grappling your own wizard and burrowing underground to escape, it has been very useful.

[magicalmagicman]

tell your dm to playtest it before whining about it.

i got fiery burst.
hell of a lot of monsters are immune to fire
2d6 is an average of 7 damage a turn
reflex for half and its super easy to hit taht save and it does 3 damage on average.
zomg!!!! 3 damage a round every round is so op!!!!!! even when half the monsters are immune to it!!!!!

reserve feats are such suboptimal trash i feel like a total noob whenever i pick it up because it shows just how clueless i am with my current wizard build to pick these worthless trash up.

so... anyways. your dms whining is a blessing in disguise. reserve feats are trap options so by your dms whining you managed to avoid falling into a trap as well.



nah, we all agree that reserve feats are trash and the only reason youd ever pick one up is if you want the +1 caster level for some reason.

the sole exception might be minor shapeshift iunno. swift actions are super important at the level i play at.

edit: if were talking outside combat then summon elemental is actually worth picking up. earth elemental triggering every trap, burrowing through every wall, grappling your own wizard and burrowing underground to escape, it has been very useful.

I concur. A DM banning reserve feats is a red flag for me. It shows significant lack of system mastery, tendency to jump to conclusions, extremely quick with the banhammer rather than try to learn to deal with it in-game, absolutely no play testing before making a judgement, and overall just terrible. Exponentially compounded if said DM has been playing the game for a very long time. I mean, 5 years in and you still think reserve feats are OP? Next thing you know he's banning Warlock and Monk.

[newguydude1]

I concur. A DM banning reserve feats is a red flag for me. It shows significant lack of system mastery, tendency to jump to conclusions, extremely quick with the banhammer rather than try to learn to deal with it in-game, absolutely no play testing before making a judgement, and overall just terrible. Exponentially compounded if said DM has been playing the game for a very long time. I mean, 5 years in and you still think reserve feats are OP? Next thing you know he's banning Warlock and Monk.

i know right. anyone who played warlock will say their damage output is such trash that you use warlocks to inflict debuffs not damage. and reserve feats do even less damage than warlocks.

if a fight lasts 4 rounds, your fighter is dishing out 20 damage a round. wow! 3 damage by me! such contribution!

power word pain is also another dm red flag. anyone who playtested power word pain would know that the party fighter kills the pwp target before you do more than 3-6 damage. he did 40, i did 6 damage. such an op spell. glad i burned a spell known and a spell slot to do 6 damage in a fight.

[Jay R]

I concur. A DM banning reserve feats is a red flag for me. It shows significant lack of system mastery, tendency to jump to conclusions, extremely quick with the banhammer rather than try to learn to deal with it in-game, absolutely no play testing before making a judgement, and overall just terrible. Exponentially compounded if said DM has been playing the game for a very long time. I mean, 5 years in and you still think reserve feats are OP? Next thing you know he's banning Warlock and Monk.

One of the difficulties in discussions like these is that we all tend to make assumptions about people we haven't even met, without realizing that they are our own invention.

He hasn't banned them.
He's dealing with them in-game.
He doesn't jump to conclusions.
He is not quick with the banhammer.
He playtests before making a decision.

He's fairly new to 3.5e, so no, he doesn't have system mastery. And he first discovered reserve feats a couple of months ago.

The first reserve feat he saw used was in a game in which a dungeon level was taken over by spores. One character's ability to cast an area effect flame spell every six seconds absolutely turned an extremely challenging adventure into a fairly easy one.

He started with AD&D, which doesn't have feats. Overall, he's a very good DM who listens to his players. I asked for advice so I could be better informed -- because he listens to his players.

[Zanos]

The first reserve feat he saw used was in a game in which a dungeon level was taken over by spores. One character's ability to cast an area effect flame spell every six seconds absolutely turned an extremely challenging adventure into a fairly easy one.
I feel like that's also trivially solved by having 5gp worth of oil flasks.

[Kurald Galain]

a dungeon level was taken over by spores. One character's ability to cast an area effect flame spell every six seconds absolutely turned an extremely challenging adventure into a fairly easy one.

I don't think that a level that relies on a single "gimmick" can be considered extremely challenging.

Because, if the PCs have a counter to this gimmick (regardless of what form this counter takes) then they turn it into a cakewalk. That doesn't mean that the PC's counter is overpowered, it means that the "challenge" is too one-sided.

(for instance, if the DM's challenge is the volcano level with lava and fire elementals, and the PCs cast Resist Energy, then that doesn't mean that spell is OP, either).

[Gruftzwerg]

I don't think that a level that relies on a single "gimmick" can be considered extremely challenging.

Because, if the PCs have a counter to this gimmick (regardless of what form this counter takes) then they turn it into a cakewalk. That doesn't mean that the PC's counter is overpowered, it means that the "challenge" is too one-sided.

(for instance, if the DM's challenge is the volcano level with lava and fire elementals, and the PCs cast Resist Energy, then that doesn't mean that spell is OP, either).

While I agree with you, I see many DMs who just don't have enough experience for multilayered challenges. Many don't even think about the abilities the PCs have when they design their encounters/gimmicks and thus feel that anything that bypasses "their cool idea" is to strong. This is best solved by helping the DM to be aware of all the important PC abilities (and maybe telling him possible counters/weaknesses).
DnD and especially 3.5 is like chess: It only is really enjoyable if both parties are on a similar level (PC vs DM). Thus the more knowledge persons should always aid the others (which is imho already common at a nice table) until they get to the same lvl.

_____________

Further as others have pointed out, many DM have a hard time with at-will abilities. Especially if they can be abused in non-combat (RP) situations. I would show him the power of warlock's and DFA's at-will abilities to give him something he can compare the reverse feats to. Invocations are much more powerful at-will abilities and can sometimes be a headache for DMs. Did you ever had a warlock running invisible all the time? Entering and leaving any/all buildings at will (Flee-the-Scene), leaving no track and can't be tracked by scent (Entrophic Warding). Most smaller settlements and towns can't stop this dirty combo at all.

[noob]

While I agree with you, I see many DMs who just don't have enough experience for multilayered challenges. Many don't even think about the abilities the PCs have when they design their encounters/gimmicks and thus feel that anything that bypasses "their cool idea" is to strong. This is best solved by helping the DM to be aware of all the important PC abilities (and maybe telling him possible counters/weaknesses).
DnD and especially 3.5 is like chess: It only is really enjoyable if both parties are on a similar level (PC vs DM). Thus the more knowledge persons should always aid the others (which is imho already common at a nice table) until they get to the same lvl.

_____________

Further as others have pointed out, many DM have a hard time with at-will abilities. Especially if they can be abused in non-combat (RP) situations. I would show him the power of warlock's and DFA's at-will abilities to give him something he can compare the reverse feats to. Invocations are much more powerful at-will abilities and can sometimes be a headache for DMs. Did you ever had a warlock running invisible all the time? Entering and leaving any/all buildings at will (Flee-the-Scene), leaving no track and can't be tracked by scent (Entrophic Warding). Most smaller settlements and towns can't stop this dirty combo at all.

While warlocks have cool at will abilities they need item crafting feats for getting the coolest wizard and cleric stuff which takes a lot more time.

[Kurald Galain]

Further as others have pointed out, many DM have a hard time with at-will abilities.
Yes, and so we should help them fix that, instead of declaring at-will abilities OP.


Did you ever had a warlock running invisible all the time? Entering and leaving any/all buildings at will (Flee-the-Scene), leaving no track and can't be tracked by scent (Entrophic Warding). Most smaller settlements and towns can't stop this dirty combo at all.
Yes, actually. We used to play 2E a lot, and 2E's invis spell lasts 24 hours. I simply do not agree that a character sneaking around everywhere and harassing the peasants is OP.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Yes, actually. We used to play 2E a lot, and 2E's invis spell lasts 24 hours. I simply do not agree that a character sneaking around everywhere and harassing the peasants is OP.The peasants would surely think so.

Of course, I doubt peasants find much of anything pleasant, especially in a magical death-world. Especially in Faerun, where pretty much all the gods are horrible except one, and she dies regularly.

[Gruftzwerg]

Yes, and so we should help them fix that, instead of declaring at-will abilities OP.


Yes, actually. We used to play 2E a lot, and 2E's invis spell lasts 24 hours. I simply do not agree that a character sneaking around everywhere and harassing the peasants is OP.
I don't think that it is OP either. But some DM have problem to deal with these kind of things. Sure we should be aiding them to overcome their shortcomings. But that doesn't happen over night when you get what I mean.
As such it is better to talk about these things beforehand (as the DM of the OP actually tries to do!^^)


The peasants would surely think so.

Of course, I doubt peasants find much of anything pleasant, especially in a magical death-world. Especially in Faerun, where pretty much all the gods are horrible except one, and she dies regularly.
This is an important factor that shouldn't be ignored imho. It can easily derail the non-combat parts of the game into a "find the ghost/thief" minigame. Which can enjoyable, but can also be a game breaker.

[Zanos]

The peasants would surely think so.

Of course, I doubt peasants find much of anything pleasant, especially in a magical death-world. Especially in Faerun, where pretty much all the gods are horrible except one, and she dies regularly.
I was about to say, at the level the warlock can do that, couldn't the party also trivially slaughter any number of peasants should the mood strike them? Someone being annoying is the least of their worries when a 7th level or higher party is rolling into town...

[noob]

The average murderhobo party goes in the village people says "run and hide" and deserts the village.
A four antipaladins party enter the village and the villagers behave the same.
A mere invisible thief does not causes the same kind of panic because people do not fear for their lives as much.