[RPG] 4E Polearm Specialist Build

A battlemind doesn't have lots of options in that regard, but there are a few with which you may be able to get close to what you want.

Note that other than your suggestion I haven't found a way to significantly increase the range at which a battlemind can mark, so most suggestions here are just workarounds or ideas which could help with increased mobility and so on.

The highest range I could find among battlemind powers with a quick Compendium search was melee weapon +3 reach (Dimensional Ambush^[DDI]) respectively close blast 3 (Obsidian Shield^[DDI]) - the rest was at most close burst 2.

Class features, powers and feats:

• Wild Focus^[DDI]: Battlemind class feature; free action, encounter, close burst 10; pull target Cha modifier squares and mark it till EOYNT.
• Speed of Thought^[DDI]: Battlemind class feature; free action, encounter; move 3 + Cha modifier squares, can be used even when surprised. Can be enhanced to 5 + Cha modifier squares with Improved Speed of Thought^[DDI].
• Persistent Harrier^[DDI]: Battlemind class feature; immediate reaction, encounter, melee weapon; when enemy hits or misses you, you attack him back (even if the target is outside your melee reach) and teleport adjacent to it.
• Iron Trap^[DDI]: Githzerai racial feat; when enemy misses you because of Iron Mind racial feature, the enemy is marked and you gain combat advantage until EOYNT.
• Demand's Reach^[DDI]: Battlemind feat, paragon tier; increase Battlemind's Demand to close burst 5.

Equipment:

• Predatory Weapon^[DDI]: Weapon power; free action, encounter; when hitting with the weapon mark one target within 5 quares until EOYNT.
• Farslayer Weapon^[DDI]: Weapon power; standard action, at-will; make melee basic attack up to 5 squares away.
• Greater Dancing Weapon^[DDI]: Weapon power; minor action, at-will; animate weapon (direct with move action, fly speed 6, must see target squares), while you can see the weapon you can make melee weapon attacks through it (counting the weapon's square as origin square instead of your square).
• Blade of the Eldritch Knight^[DDI]: Weapon property; when using a standard action to make a melee attack increase reach to 5 for that attack.
• Planesplitter Weapon^[DDI]: Weapon power; free action, encounter; when making a melee attack increase weapon reach by +2 squares.

In any case you might want to take a look at the "Beyond Bodily Brutality: the Basics of Building Battleminds" handbook on the WotC boards.

And yes, your assumption is correct. Taking Student of the Sword^[DDI] would allow you to mark any enemy once per encounter with any attack that is made with the selected weapon type (one-handed melee or two-handed melee) regardless of hit or miss.

Yes, there is a good reason for feat prerequisites.

Two reasons, in fact:

• To clarify by indicating what build a feat is intended for (a feat that boosts Lay on Hands usually requires that you have Lay on Hands)

• To balance by forcing players to dedicate more resources in order to take a more powerful feat.

I suspect the reason you're surprised to encounter this is that by and large 4e feat prerequisites are for clarity: if there's a feat we want, we probably already qualify for it. (In previous editions of D&D prerequisites were much harsher and it was common to plan our characters around qualifying for certain feats.) It's surprising to find a feat we want that we can't take in 4e.

Mastery feats need to be balanced carefully:

Feats like the Mastery set can be very powerful: they double crit range from 1/20 to 1/10, and for a build that 'fishes' for critical hits that's pretty massive (other builds wouldn't be as impressed by it, but a feat's value shouldn't be based on its usefulness to a character that wouldn't take it anyway). Consider a burst/blast wizard who attacks an average of 4 targets each round: compared to a character with expanded crit who makes one attack in the same time, the wizard with expanded crit will deal maximum damage every 3 rounds instead of every 10. If he has specialized in making his criticals awesome, this is very powerful.

In order to allow such feats to exist without unbalancing the system 4e has imposed more stringent prerequisites to take them. But...

The requirements really aren't that harsh:

Prerequisite: 21st level, Dex 15, Int 21, Wis 15, wizard

At level 21 two of a character's abilities can have increased by +6, and the other four abilities have increased by +2. This means that for Wizard Implement Expertise I can start with (before racial modifiers, assuming I take a race with +Int) a 13 Int, Dex, and Wis to qualify at 21 without focusing on either of those secondary stats or having racial bonuses to them. Roughly two out of every three wizards will have focused on at least one of them, and it's important to remember that the 4e stat generating system makes it impossible for me to start with less than a 14 in at least one stat.

A player who wants the feat should have been considering it ahead of time and planned accordingly--but even a wizard who hadn't planned to get the feat is likely to qualify. (If I want it so bad anyway, I've got two +1 stat bumps at 24 and 28 to bring my 11 up to a 13 and still enjoy the feat for the last three levels of the game.)

Sure, change it if you like.

The phrase "feat tax" gets thrown around a lot. It seems to mean that there are specific feats I need to take in order to not be a burden on my party. I generally disagree with this idea because it presupposes a specific kind of character optimization which is just one style of play rather than a philosophy of the game design.

Feat slots are limited for a reason: to force choice. There are better and worse choices, though 4e has done a surprisingly good job of limiting downright awful choices. By lifting feat prereqs and granting free feats, your group would be saying these choices aren't part of the kind of game they want to play.

And if that's your party's play style, go for it: there's no wrong way to play the game provided everyone's safe and happy. But it's not the way the game was designed, and the game wasn't designed by accident (however much I joke about the adventure writers), so we're less surprised by mechanics like these if we understand the original philosophy behind them.