Attacking with a 'Reach Weapon' inside the reach limit

I believe I have seen similar rules suggested or hinted at in supplements, this version is what I always use in my campaigns and have ever since I switched to 3rd Edition, it's (obviously!) not Planescape specific.

When using a 'reach weapon', it is possible to strike targets within the reach limit but only at a -4 penalty to attack and damage rolls. This simulates the difficulty of bringing the end of the weapon to bear at close range or using the shaft / haft of the weapon to hit the target. This will also often alter the damage type of a weapon to 'bludgeoning' for these attacks and a character might choose to close the range and make such attacks purely to alter damage type if, for example, they find an undead creature resistant to their normal damage. In many cases magic enhancements should not apply either, though an allowance of +1 to hit for the Masterwork quality could be appropriate.Why: I feel that the standard rules are unrealistic in permitting no attacks at all within the weapon's reach. Having used real 'reach weapons' I am aware of the difficulties of making such attacks and the sound reasons for rushing an opponent who is trying to use a 'reach weapon', but equally I know that a skilled user can make effective (though much less so) attacks even so and then proceed to drive an opponent back to the ideal distance or successfully back off to achieve the same effect.Pro: Means that your players are more likely to properly use such weapons, e.g. no more using others as a 'shield' to prevent themselves from being rushed, since this is less necessary (it also rarely was used in reality). Also prevents them from dealing with opponents who have reach in the same one-dimensional, predictable and unrealistic way the standard rules encourage; i.e. charge / tumble inside the reach and attack with impunity.

Con: It will make opponents with 'reach weapons' much less easy to defeat, since they will still be able to attack the PCs, albeit with a penalty. Some groups may want to keep combat simple, in which case this rule is probably not for them.