On the fallacy of maximum damage applying effects

One of the easier methods to apply a weapon effect, especially when house ruling, is that said effect is applied when maximum weapon damage is rolled. Axes causing bleeding, blunts stunning and other similar effects usually fall in those house rules, but so do other instances like in Dark Sun 2e, where rolling your maximum damage for a non-metal weapon has a chance of it breaking.

I find this ruling weak, to say the least, for the simple fact that it is strongly skewed towards low-end weapons. By that I mean weapons with a low range of damage (like a dagger) are far more likely to have a special trait take effect, compared to high-end weapons, those with a high range of damage (like a two-handed sword). Let's take an example: two characters enter combat; one is wielding a weapon dealing 1d4 damage, the other a weapon dealing 1d10 damage. The first character has a whooping 1 in 4 (or 25%) chance of applying any of the weapon's effects, the other a mere 1 in 10 (or 10%). On a similar note, with weapon breakage rules in Dark Sun, a quabone (1d4) is more often prone to break in an attack than a lotulis (1d10).

A counter-argument to this would be that one trades a weapon's special trait with raw damage. It tends to balance out the difference in weapon damage. A sling stone's damage might be considered negligible (1d4) but it's more likely to stun the enemy, whereas a pole-arm (a lucern hammer or a tetsubo, no. 10 and 7 respectively) that deals a significant amount of damage (1d10) isn't as effective in stunning the opponent. While reasonable a point to present each combatant with even chances of contribution in a battle, the halfling stunning opponents with its sling so the fighter can easily hack them with its two-handed sword, I need to stress that classes in B/X have distinct roles that extend beyond combat, the latter not being given much emphasis as in later iterations of the system. Instead of handing out abilities and traits in combat, certain B/X classes possess non-combat features in their area of specialisation, like the dwarf's ability to find traps, the halfling's ability to hide, cleric and magic-user utility spells, etc. It might make sense in the current edition, where everyone should take an active part in a combat-focused setting, to compensate the lack of damage with a special effect. However, the only reasons I see this being implemented in OSR games is to give extra flavour and dread in combat.

If one were to craft house rules for weapon effects, I'd suggest picking a chance when rolling to hit. A 3 in 20 for instance (or 15%), usually 18-20, to apply the weapon's special trait whenever someone makes an attack with said weapon. Like how critical hits were handled in most of the later editions of the game, all weapons have a flat chance of inflicting a special effect, apart from hitting (it is implied here that a character scores a hit when rolling that high). Alternatively, for those not keen on the luck factor, whenever you deal damage with a weapon, you also apply any of its special effects, but you can give the target a saving throw to avoid them, as is usual with monster special attacks. If the latter sounds like more book-keeping, you can always roll a d6 whenever you deal damage, with a 1 (or 1-2) in 6 chance of the weapon causing a special effect.