What if you could stack bonuses and abilities from using two weapons?

[SinsI]

I.e. if you are using two swords, each +1 and deals additional 1d6 fire,
when you are getting +2 to attack rolls and each strike with each of them would deal +2 +2d6 fire.
Only magical bonuses stack, their adamantine/cold iron/silver quality is still determined on an individual weapon basis.

Would it still suck compared to two-handed weapon use? Or would it become overpowered?

[Godskook]

1.TWF doesn't suck compared to THF in general, its just that the styles appeal to different builds entirely, to the point that a build that wants one of them is usually and basically useless using the other.

2.As spoken, probably blatantly broken, but if you abide by stacking rules as normal(like with bows and arrows), it should only be mildly overpowered at worst.

[SinsI]

1.TWF doesn't suck compared to THF in general, its just that the styles appeal to different builds entirely, to the point that a build that wants one of them is usually and basically useless using the other.

Really?
1. You pay twice more for weapons.
2. You lose two-handed bonus from Strength and Power Attack
3. You get huge to-hit penalties that can only go away if you pay a feat tax and use light weapon.
4. Light weapons don't have reach
5. Light weapons get a -4 penalty on various combat maneuvers - disarm and the like
6. Light weapons have worse damage dice
(added later) 7. You can't use second weapon in Attack of Opportunity.

And all that for one extra attack?

[eggynack]

Really?
1. You pay twice more for weapons.
2. You lose two-handed bonus from Strength and Power Attack
3. You get huge to-hit penalties that can only go away if you pay a feat tax and use light weapon.
4. Light weapons don't have reach
5. Light weapons get a -4 penalty on various combat maneuvers - disarm and the like
6. Light weapons have worse damage dice

And all that for one extra attack?
I think the point is that you run a source of bonus damage, like sneak attack or DFI, and that gives the extra attacks some benefit over THF. Also, it's pretty trivial to get more than one extra attack, especially if you use gloves of the balanced hand. TWF is certainly not the best way to go about things most of the time, but it has its moments.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Really?
1. You pay twice more for weapons.
2. You lose two-handed bonus from Strength and Power Attack
3. You get huge to-hit penalties that can only go away if you pay a feat tax and use light weapon.
4. Light weapons don't have reach
5. Light weapons get a -4 penalty on various combat maneuvers - disarm and the like
6. Light weapons have worse damage dice

And all that for one extra attack?

1) It's actually a lot more cost-efficient. Two +1 weapons cost 4600 + (base cost of two weapons, typically between 0 and 100) gp. One +2 weapon costs 8300 + (base cost of one weapon, typically between 0 and 50) gp, for the same bonus.
2) As demonstrated, you can fairly easily double up on bonuses to mitigate this drawback.
3) If both weapons are +2, the penalties for two-weapon fighting with a light weapon (with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat) are completely mitigated. If both weapons are +4, the penalties for two-weapon fighting with a one-handed weapon are completely mitigated. At this point, even Power Attacking with both is a better option than Power Attacking with a single two-handed weapon, provided you have charge or something of the sort, because you're getting the same net returns on your Power Attack (and better returns on Strength), but for a less all-or-nothing ordeal.
4) Be Large or larger.
5) Wear locked gauntlets.
6) Damage die are literally the smallest contributing factor in a weapon's effectiveness at most levels of optimization. The Crescent Knife underscores this point completely: it does only 1d3 of damage dice, but is completely overpowered, because every attack action you make (or attack made as part of a full attack action) allows you two attack rolls, each of which can hit separately, and applies bonuses individually. If this weapon did zero damage and only applied modifiers, it would STILL be ridiculous.

[Crake]

1) It's actually a lot more cost-efficient. Two +1 weapons cost 4600 + (base cost of two weapons, typically between 0 and 100) gp. One +2 weapon costs 8300 + (base cost of one weapon, typically between 0 and 50) gp, for the same bonus.
2) As demonstrated, you can fairly easily double up on bonuses to mitigate this drawback.
3) If both weapons are +2, the penalties for two-weapon fighting with a light weapon (with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat) are completely mitigated. If both weapons are +4, the penalties for two-weapon fighting with a one-handed weapon are completely mitigated. At this point, even Power Attacking with both is a better option than Power Attacking with a single two-handed weapon, provided you have charge or something of the sort, because you're getting the same net returns on your Power Attack (and better returns on Strength), but for a less all-or-nothing ordeal.
4) Be Large or larger.
5) Wear locked gauntlets.
6) Damage die are literally the smallest contributing factor in a weapon's effectiveness at most levels of optimization. The Crescent Knife underscores this point completely: it does only 1d3 of damage dice, but is completely overpowered, because every attack action you make (or attack made as part of a full attack action) allows you two attack rolls, each of which can hit separately, and applies bonuses individually. If this weapon did zero damage and only applied modifiers, it would STILL be ridiculous.

I think most of those points were referring to TWF without the changes suggested by the OP.

Personally I would instead suggest weapon sets, where two weapons can be enchanted as a set and only gain their bonuses when held in both hands by one person. Make up some bs about the wielder acting as a connector from hand chakra to hand chakra, creating a resonance between the two weapons which allows it to work off a single enchantment, and why they only function while actually held in both hands.

Or maybe have a main weapon which can have like, a +1 or +2 ability that allows you to copy it's abilities over to the weapon in your offhand, so long as it isnt magical.

[Godskook]

Really?

Yep


1. You pay twice more for weapons.

Misleading. You simply use a slightly weaker weapon(a +1 to +3 loss depending on wealth). On the flipside, you benefit double from GMW, and most TWF users have in-class means of getting it via UMD, a feature THF usually can't say.


2. You lose two-handed bonus from Strength and Power Attack
3. You get huge to-hit penalties that can only go away if you pay a feat tax and use light weapon.

"The TWF feat is a feat tax" but "Power Attack is a feat". Whut?


4. Light weapons don't have reach

Reach is good, but its not really crippling. Otoh, every body has access to enlarge person, and that gives reach; again, TWF users have *EASIER* access to it, as well.

Also, Kusari-gama is technically available.


5. Light weapons get a -4 penalty on various combat maneuvers - disarm and the like

So? TWF users are also running 10 Str and maxin Dex, so they weren't doing that anyway. Combat maneuvers builds are just that, *BUILDS*. You're not going to make a TWF disarm build for the same reason you're not going to make an ubercharging wizard: Its a bad combination.


6. Light weapons have worse damage dice

How does a single d6(or less) matter when you're swinging for upwards of +10d6 bonus dice? Like, seriously.


(added later) 7. You can't use second weapon in Attack of Opportunity.

Again, so? AoO buids are builds. Everyone else only gets 1 and doesn't rely on it for their damage.


And all that for one extra attack?

Typically 3, but you can probably swing 4 if you work at it.

[SinsI]

Misleading. You simply use a slightly weaker weapon(a +1 to +3 loss depending on wealth). On the flipside, you benefit double from GMW, and most TWF users have in-class means of getting it via UMD, a feature THF usually can't say.

Yes, and losing +1 to +3 ability on every attack is quite a big loss.


"The TWF feat is a feat tax" but "Power Attack is a feat". Whut?

You need numerous feats - Ambidextrous, Improved TWF, Greater TWF, etc, and all for extra attacks that are made at worse and worse bonus.
And without Power Attack you are seriously screwed by DR.


Reach is good, but its not really crippling. OTOH, everybody has access to enlarge person, and that gives reach; again, TWF users have *EASIER* access to it, as well.
For a melee, reach is almost a must. And a lot of Dex races that go for TWF are small so EP is not enough to give them reach.



So? TWF users are also running 10 Str and maxin Dex, so they weren't doing that anyway. Combat maneuvers builds are just that, *BUILDS*. You're not going to make a TWF disarm build for the same reason you're not going to make an ubercharging wizard: Its a bad combination.
Tell it to the enemy that Sunders your weapons into pieces or Disarms the hell out of you.


How does a single d6(or less) matter when you're swinging for upwards of +10d6 bonus dice? Like, seriously.
If that point of damage makes the difference between dead enemy and alive enemy that kills you on his next turn - a lot.


Again, so? AoO buids are builds. Everyone else only gets 1 and doesn't rely on it for their damage.
TWF usually have good dexterity, so taking Combat Reflexes is not unheard of.
And it is actually worse - you can only use your second weapon if you Full-attack, so anything that requires Standard Attack also loses a lot.


Typically 3, but you can probably swing 4 if you work at it.
With at least 3 feats, and each at such terrible bonus you'd wish you didn't bother.
If you really want many attacks - go for Natural weapons, 2-3 feats and all of them are at your BAB.