I think they misrepresented artefacts in Exalted (there's much of the game I don't agree with or want to improve on which is why I write about it so much.) Magical weapons are a case in point. It's easy to use them as an example because they are all variants of normal 'mundane' weapons and have a long string of stats so they have a family of normal objects they can be compared to and their performance can be expressed statistically.
The thing I think they should change about artefacts, in this case weapons, is the way they differ from ordinary objects and their basic statistical superiority. In essence the problem is they are designed (from a rules point of view) based on the fact that their superiority is a result of the fact they are constructed of magical materials (bloody badly written sentence, someone coughed and broke my concentration.) The two elements of artefact construction are they are made from the magical materials and esoteric ingredients. But because of their aesthetic form and their blatant superiority the esoteric ingredient element of their design is more of an afterthought to making something out of a slab of jade.
At the real root of the problem is the very existence of rules for magical weapons. Specifically a set of rules that gives specific stats for each one. The artefacts are truly generic with any optional special powers added onto their already potent capabilities. To compare this to the magic items of Warhammer this stands out because in Warhammer there was no such thing as an equivalent to a daiklave. There were a host of magic swords but each one was made by a mastercraftsman, the esoteric ingredients in it's construction were desscribed and each one was unique. True some weapons were made to a common design such as the Runefangs but the unique element of the ingredients used in their construction such as metal heated in the fire of dragon breath were more important than the materials they were made of.
Before I discovered the artefact weapon section at the back of the book I was giddy with excitement at how such weapons would be superior to their normal counterparts. I'd heard of the bonuses that apply from using the magical materials before reading about the rules for artefact weapons. Now I think artefact construction should be viewed more from that perspective. My idea on how artefacts should be designed follows:
Use the statistics for mundane weapons as a base.
Artefacts are invariably made as superior equipment. How superior you can decide when you make them, exceptional and especially perfect artefacts would take appropriately longer. I want to address the rules for making superior equipment as they're a bit fuzzy or incorrect to me.
The apply the appropriate magical material bonus to the artefact.
The essential point of creating an artefact weapon isn't that it simply has higher accuracy, defense, rate, does appalling damage etc. but the original powers the maker choses to invest it with. You could simply make it easier to hit an enemy with or much larger and capable of doing more damage but it's real value is in the powers that result from the esoteric ingredients used in it's construction.
When I was creating Gilius' Staff Ryuk I hit on the idea of using the manse power Sentient as a model for creating him as an entity. Since then I've thought of using a similar system of points and power ranking schemes for creating different levels of artefacts. More will follow once I've given some thought to it.
