Spell Focus? Is it worth it?

[LordAO]

Spell Focus is definately woth it! It increases the save DCs by 2, which is equivalent to having an attribute 4 points higher! It is also a prerequisite for many prestige classes, such as the Archmage. Of course some schools are better than others. The best picks are Illusion, Enchantment, and Evocation, since virtually all of those spells offer saves. Transmutation and Necromancy can also be pretty good picks, but don't even consider Conjuration or Divination, very few of those spells even have saving throws. Abjuration isn't entirely worthless, but there arent many of those spells that have saves either. Of course, if you're a specialist, you should always get spell focus, if not greater spell focus, in your specialty school, since you depend so much on those spells.

 

[TroyXavier]

Yes, Spell Focus is a nice little thing to have. My 16 th level wizard has Spell Focus Transmutation and it's quite effective.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

I am playing a 2nd level wizard necromancer who also likes cold spells. Since I am human, I took Spell Focus (necromancy) and Spell Focus (evocation) as my first two feats. The extra +2 has made my spells very tough to save against. I plan to get Greater Spell Focus for at least one of these, if not both.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

My opinion: spell focus is worth it if you concentrate your knowledge on one school which has saves.

A wizard who prepares two haste spells and a summon monster III at sixth level (like the wizard I'm currently playing) will not benefit from spell focus.

Similarly, a 4th level wizard who prepares a sculpted burning hands, a glitterdust and a flaming sphere in his 2nd level slots will not benefit much from a spell focus feat since it will only effect one of the spells he casts each day.

On the other hand, a wizard whose loadout looks like this:
Mage Armor, Shield, Magic Missile x3
Glitterdust, Flaming sphere x3
Haste, Fly, Fireball x2
will benefit from spell focus evocation.

Similarly, a wizard whose spell loadout is:
Mage Armor, Shield, Magic Missile, Burning Hands x2
See Invisibility, Blindness/Deafness x2, Enlarged Burning Hands
Haste, Slow x2
will benefit significantly from spell focus alteration (also note that he has a rather good selection of fort, reflex, and will save spells).

So a wizard who uses a lot of spells from different schools will probably be better served by feats which can effect all his spells (empower spell, spell penetration, etc) or item creation feats. A wizard who uses lots of spells from one school can really benefit from spell focus and greater spell focus in that school.

Incidentally, the previous poster was correct. Spell focus and greater spell focus will make much more than a 10% difference in the number of your enemies who make their saving throws.

If your normal DC for slow is 16 and your spell focus DC is 18, a fighter with a +3 will save can be expected to save 30% of the time against slow without the spell focus feat and 20% of the time if you have the spell focus feat. Thus he is 33% less likely to save if you take spell focus.

Regarding spell focus: Evocation, don't discount it. Evocation spells look very flashy but don't really do a lot of damage at low levels. The average damage of a 6th level fireball is 21--10 if the enemy saves. Now most foes at 6th level will notice 21 points of damage but 10 is less than they expect from an AoO. You'd do more damge with magic missiles. In addition evocation spells have to deal with evasion and elemental resistances. It's very hard to hurt a creature with even Fire Resist 15 if it successfully saves against your fireball. It's impossible to hurt a creature with evasion if it saves against the fireball. Spell focus really helps make evocations effective in these circumstances.

 

[Li Shenron]

IMHO, Spell Focus is more useful for a spellcaster who often uses the same spell, or few spells from the same school. At lower lever, your Sorcerer may have just a couple of offensive spell which he casts on a regular basis.

It is somehow limited because you get the bonus only in 1 school over 8. On the opposite, the defender with a feat gets the same bonus in 1 saving throw over 3! On the other hand, you can choose which spell to cast, but not which spell to be targeted by...

 

[Thanee]

If you cast spells on targets that allow a save and you want them to succeed, you better make sure, that the save is difficult at least. Therefore spell power is extremely valuable to any mage that does this regularily (i.e. battle mage).

Spell Focus increases spell power and therefore is worth it for sure, if it fits with your concept!

If all you do is boost yourself or others with your spells, it surely isn't even worth a look.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

The FRCS feat Spellcasting Prodigy (if allowed) is also a good pick, as it effectively increases the spell power of all you spells by one. And since you are a generalist wizard, this surely is a nice thing.

At higher levels Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration really come into play, as Spell Resistance is so much more common.

Spell Focus naturally seems more useful for those all or nothing spells, but with Evocation the feat is also extremely valuable, as a failed save drastically increases the effectiveness of those spells.

Spell Focus (Illusion) is very cool because of the Shadow Evocation spells alone, as you cover two schools in one with this!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Methos]

Spell Focus - Thanks

Folks,

Thanks for all of your responses. I will be taking Spell Focus in at least one school, but it will be very difficult to decide which one(s).

It would seem like the best choices for me will be Enchantment, Necromancy, and also Evocation. I've reconsidered my stance on Evocation since it appears to be more valuable than I originally thought. My original thought with respect to Evocation that most saves are for 1/2, so that you can still do damage with them even with the save, but with the other 2 schools it is all or nothing.

However, given that many opponents may have evasion, damage resistence, evasion, etc., it may prove valuable anyway.

Thanks again.

Methos

 

[Gwarthkam]

???
It is exactly 10%. Also in your example.
17 needed <=> P(save) = 20% <=> P(fail) = 80%
19 needed <=> P(save) = 10% <=> P(fail) = 90%
21 needed <=> P(save) = 5% <=> P(fail) = 95% (if 20 always success)

It is usually a benefit of more than 10%.

if you compare needing 18 (15%) and 20 (5%), the chance of the opponent failing triples. Cutting the opponents succesfull outcome down to 1/2 or sometimes 1/3 is not merely the same as a 10% increase.

even if you try to look at it the way you do it's not "exactly 10%"
going from 80% to 90% is a 12.5% increase in succes
going from 5% to 15% is a 200% increase in succes, etc.

And as you yourself show us above, going from a required 19 to 21 is only a 5% gain in your method of counting, so it's not "exactly 10%"

when measuring percentages like you want to do, don't use differences, use ratios.

 

[Nail]

when measuring percentages like you want to do, don't use differences, use ratios.

...Or not. Both ways are correct.