I had an idea for a another take on racial and cultural weapons:
Instead of going with "elven shortblade" which is basically a shortsword with a better crit range and so on, there could be one (or more) variants per race and/or culture, which are better than the normal version, and one weapon category higher.
So you have the longbow (martial ranged, 1d8, x3), and the elven longbow (exotic ranged, 1d10, x3), or the Kelish scimitar (exotic one-handed, 1d8, 17-20).
You could just state for each race and culture what sort of weapons they have (i.e. Kelish scimitars do 1d8 damage).
They would be treated as the standard weapon for feats and the like (except that you'd need to be proficient in the exotic version, of course).
The best part would be that all races/cultures would get weapon familiarity with "their" weapons.
You could also go real generic with this rule (making it more approachable by 3rd parties wishing to use the PRPG rueset) -
A race or subrace is considered proficient with any weapon that has its racial name in the title. Furthermore, the racial version of the weapon is increased to the next larger dam. die, the threat range is increased by +1, and the range increment is increased by 10'. For all other game rules, the weapon is considered to be the standard version, unless otherwise stipulated by the game rules governing said weapon.
Then, the only weapons that need be discussed would be ones that go over and above that basic ruling, such as an Elvish bow that gets an aditional +10' in the hands of an Elf, or a Kaelish Scimitar that gets an aditional +1 threat range when used by Kaelish.
That's a heck of a buff. Usually, only one of those things is improved, not all three.
Personally, I prefer the 'standard weapons with new names' approach, like saying, for instance:
Orison soldiers are armed with traditional kopeshes. These hooked blades have the same stats as a longsword.
I'd have preferred a +1 to the damage, rather then increasing the die myself, but thats already built into some of the weapons we are talking about (unless those become the exceptions, of course).
You're right about the range modifier added in with the others - I'd use the +1 dam across the board, and then make it either a +1 Crit threat for melee or a +10' for ranged.
I'm just throwing things out there for others to build upon.
Re-naming weapons is cool, but I usually like a least one in-game difference (perhaps an increase to the disarm chance for the weapon you mentioned, or some-such small 'boost'?)
I'd have preferred a +1 to the damage, rather then increasing the die myself, but thats already built into some of the weapons we are talking about (unless those become the exceptions, of course).
The difference between a 1d6 and a 1d8 is, on average, one damage.
You're right about the range modifier added in with the others - I'd use the +1 dam across the board, and then make it either a +1 Crit threat for melee or a +10' for ranged.
I'm just throwing things out there for others to build upon.
Re-naming weapons is cool, but I usually like a least one in-game difference (perhaps an increase to the disarm chance for the weapon you mentioned, or some-such small 'boost'?)
As nice (and cool!) as the small bonuses are, I am opposed to them for two main reasons:
1) Complexity: Have you seen a 2nd edition Arms and Equipment guide? It's a mess. There are too many options. I prefer broad categories, so when a player wants a cool looking sword, I don't have to worry about it not actually being a longsword.2) Power level: I don't like obsoleting mainstays of the game. I don't like the Sawtooth Sabre because it's strictly better than a longsword. There is no reason to use a longsword over a sawtooth sabre. In order to be 'just better' than the existing martial weapons, you need to be exotic. And racial proficiencies should only bump things down a notch (i.e. Exotic -> martial -> simple), not make it so that Dwarf peasants are running around with Waraxes.
Go to a museum and look for crazy spiked swords with two blades and stuff. You won't find them, or at least none for actual combat use. And it's not because "exotic" weapons would require so much training: it's because a plain old sword is about as efficient a piercing or slashing weapon as has ever been designed. Extra "bells and whistles" don't actually improve the usefulness of weapons. Mark me down as a "no thanks" in terms of creating a whole class of racial super-weapons.
2) Power level: I don't like obsoleting mainstays of the game. I don't like the Sawtooth Sabre because it's strictly better than a longsword. There is no reason to use a longsword over a sawtooth sabre.
It's lighter, yes. But that's not really a concern. Unless you have the feat, you get no real advantage of the sawtooth sabre.
Also note that it costs 20 gp more. That's why the longsword's still a mainstay. if you're training your army, you save 20 tacken per soldier. That can quickly go into the thousands in a city.
So I guess my 'Umpleby War Muffin" is out of the question?
And I wouldn't give EVERYONE the racial weapon - they need to be a member of a PC class (meaning 'townsfolk' are out, but special NPCs are in).
Ane while we are on this topic, shouldn't a Beer Stein count as a 'natural weapon' for Dwarves?
I'm looking forward to the half-orc scythe (2d6 damage, 19-20/x4 crit).