I've worked with Lightroom & Photoshop but they offer so much more than I want. I don't want editing that changes the whole photograph. I need to edit very little. I do shoot in raw & JPEG but find raw is taking up too much room & yes I know it has more information. I work with Faststone & really like it but just wondered what else was out there. So...thank you to those who gave me the information I was asking & not making a rude comment. I really thought this was a site to learn on ?!

I'm guessing that nothing will do as well as a top-shelf Circular Polarizer in the field. That is, if you can use one. I started to get away from filters in the field when the front end of lenses limited their use. Plus, in film days, because I used Pro-size rectangular filters and had a filter mount on each of my lenses, my filter system was eating-up a lot of room in my camera backpack.
I did testing with images where I used a glass Polarizer at various degrees of strength vs images where I didn't use a filter but "Polarized" in PP. Close enough for my taste. Plus doing it in PP gave me much more flexibility with what I wanted the filter to affect and what I did not.
Water is dicey, as you said. But I am generally happy with PP eliminating water drops on foliage and letting more color come through. Check these images of Dingmans Falls.Perhaps a tad too strong, but I hope you see my point.