I worked ont he book, so I might be construed as slightly biased, but please take this as sincere observations

.
Psion said:
As has been alluded too, both books have a "dedicated specialist" class, which I found to be a totally redundant concept.
I would say 'yes and no...' to this. I thought the creation of a classthat was limited to just one type of arcane spell really lent itself to the idea of a true specialist. If you are a 'Dedicated Conjuror' you're going to be really good at it, but your approach to problems will be conpletely different from that of a 'Dedicated Illusionist'. The inclusion of the Universal category to all of them made it still functional, since the key metamagical effects are in that category. So while I agree that it's somewhat redundant with the current specialist (or I suppose with those somewhat creepy 3.5 specialists), I think that for a home game, eliminating the PHB speciailst and bringing in the FFG 'devoteds' would be REALLY cool

. the true 'Wizards' would have this amazing ability to cast spells of every school, a remarkable flexibility (and one saddly all too evident in the the existing specialists...), but not have all the unique perks of the devoted classes.
So, basically, I defend them as a neat toolbox option, and one that could really hone the concepts in a customized campaign. Which I think should be a goal for any new core class, really.
Fortunately, the rest of the books don't rely on them, and the PrCs and spells are eminently usable with normal specialists and generalists.

Thank you
Did'ja ever notice how few Arcane caster PrCs include progression for your familiar

?