Making Polearm Gambit accessible at Heroic Tier

[Stalker0]

Generally I'm not a big fan of reach weapons in 4e...at least not until you get the Polearm Gamble feat. With that feat, reach weapons get back some of their old glory.

I want to move the feat to the heroic level so a reach weapon fighter becomes more viable at low levels, and retweak the balance to make it work. Here's what I have.


Polearm Gamble (heroic):

Normal text with the following change: You can make an opportunity attack, at a -4 penalty.

11th level: Remove the penalty to the opportunity attack.



What do you think, is the balance about right, is the penalty too strong, too weak?

 

[ravenheart]

Good idea, but I think it's hardly worth it. At a -4 penalty you'll only end up dragging out the fight with a lot of whiffing attacks and potentially allowing a mid-move change of tactics for the target (since you can't make more than 1 OA/turn, it might slip past you, possibly taking a shortcut in doing so). And I assume you didn't plan on removing the combat advantage clause? Cause that makes it twice as bad.

I'd make it an immediate interrupt instead, and maybe add an additional clause for a 21st level rider, either make it trigger on a ranged attack within you reach or remove the combat advantage clause.

 

[Mentat55]

I dunno, a -4 penalty can be pretty easily overcome by a fighter with a decent Wisdom and Blade Opportunist and/or Combat Reflexes. And Polearm Gamble is a very juicy feat.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Its a nice feat for a fairly specific character build. Truthfully even as a polearm fighter there are higher priority feats and I think it would be pretty rare to take it before say 8th level. No doubt someone would, but with a -4 penalty I can't see it being anyone's 1st, 2nd, or 3rd feat priority.

The thing is, there are just better military weapons than any of the pole arms. I don't think a weaker version of PG is going to convince someone to make a choice between the +2 1d10 halberd or +2 2d4 glaive and swinging an execution axe or fullblade instead. The "inescapable fisherman" type builds really don't start kicking in till paragon because there are several feats and powers you really need to combine in order to make it all work. PG by itself is probably just not enough. And with a -4 to-hit and granting CA it can actually backfire on you with only a marginal chance of much to gain.

However, I'm pretty sure its not going to break anything and if you want to experiment, then you should!

 

[jstomel]

Generally speaking I think polearms are most useful for non-defender classes. There are a few striker classes that benefit from being able to attack from a range and then move away without drawing and AO. With warlords it allows them to use their abilities from the back ranks where they can take greater advantage of their ability to shift people around the terrain. All in all, it is a weapon for people who want to be able to attack without putting themselves in the direct line of fire.