Knowledge Sinkhole said:
Amazing. I don't post that often, however, when I do start a new topic, I seem to generate quite a bit of controversy. Anyway, I have been reading the responses with a fair amount of interest, and here are my additional thoughts on this:
1. SF, and GSF are not completely useless; just not as effective as they used to be. Nobody would argue with the fact that any feat that grants a bonus of some sort is useful.
2. My original comment that they were "must haves" really relate more to some specific schools, particularly enchantment, necromancy, and possibly illusion. Why these schools, and not some others? Well, simply because many of the spells from these schools fall into the category of "all or nothing". If an opponent makes his save against many evocation spells, for example, the opponent will still take damage, however, against many spells from the foregoing schools, there is no effect whatsoever. As a result, feats that increase the caster's DC to save against spells from these schools become vitally important, when compared to DC's to save from other schools. In fact, in contrast, taking SF for Divination would be useless in almost all circumstances.
3. My opinion (just an opinion) is that comparing SF feats to other feats (a bit dodgy at the best of times and maybe a bit of an apples to oranges comparison anyway), is that the +1 increase to the DC may not be entirely comparable to the feat spell penetration, or in the case of a fighter WF at +1. Why? Well, as some other posters have mentioned, WF applies to all fighter attacks with a chosen weapon, SF applies only to spells from a specific school, and not all spells will necessarily have a save attached to them. For example, certain spells affect oneself, and not an opponent. So, your ability to apply the SF bonus to spells becomes increasingly limited only to certain spells that a spellcaster might have memorized.
Secondly, when comparing the SF feat to spell penetration, the obvious is that SF is now +1, whereas SP is +2. On the surface, it is obvious that SP is now better since it applies to all schools whereas SF only applies to the chosen school. Of course, the comparison isn't that simple since not all opponents will have SR, but all opponents have a save. I would however, argue that SF should perhaps have remained at +2 since the offset that it only applies to one school, may offset the fact that SP applies to all schools, but only to particular opponents. Again, a matter of opinion.
4. Some posters have suggested (a bit sarcastically, I think) that any wizard/sorcerer should have a variety of spells memorized/prepared from different schools anyway. There is some truth to that, however, again, it isn't as simple when looking at sorcerers and specialist wizards. Sorcerers, in particular, are severely limited in their spell selection by the nature of the class. In effect, what we are saying is that all sorcerers should really just focus on spells that are uber damage causing spells since they will always be able to deal some damage then. I think that this is a bit of a crock myself. The great thing about this edition of the game is that you have a tremendous amount of choice and flexibility. If I choose to play a sorcerer with a more subtle nature who focuses on illusion for example, I should have the ability to do that, and not get locked into a stereotype. The same argument applies to a lesser extent to the specialist wizard.
5. The comparison to feats such as Great Fortitude and Iron Will has some merit, I believe. If these feats increase your save by +2, or in a sense 4 ability points, why shouldn't SF be a +2 bonus, particularly when the increased save feats are for all effects, not just spells, but SF is for spells from a specific school. I personally believe that there is a disconnect.
6. Lastly, trying to beat the saving throw for many monsters at high levels is extremely difficult; so difficult that if you consider a wizard casting a 9th level spell who has an Int bonus of +5, the save DC is 24. There are a great many monsters, for example, many demons or devils that have bonuses that are at least +14 or higher before considering any magic items that they may have, or their SR, effectively providing a second saving throw if you will. Not to mention buffed up NPC characters. So, SF at +2 and GSF at +2 become far more important to spell casters at high level. If they can't damage high level creatures with their spells, the average wizard will get the living hell beaten out of them (pun intended.
In any event, I think that my original question might have been a bit flippant, and my conclusion is that SF and GSF are still useful at +1, but perhaps not quite as desirable as certain other feats might be. It is of course, a matter of taste and opinion. I think that I do agree with some posters that at +2, it could (I don't think so) have been overpowered, but at +1 it might be underpowered. Too bad you can't have a +1.5.
Sorry, for the long-winded reply.
Cheers
