Mechanics or story?

[diaglo]

Neither! Seriously. If I had to choose between one extreme or the other, I'd choose another hobby.

qft

 

[Drowbane]

Crunch

One or the other, eh?

Crunch.

"Fluff only"... thats Amber, right?

 

[painandgreed]

Mechanics. I've already got my own story.

 

[RFisher]

Neither & both. (^_~)

I don't really need (more of) either. But that hasn't kept me from acquiring new stuff, though I don't buy a whole lot.

In both cases, I tend to be looking more for inspiration than for something to use directly.

 

[Ron]

It seems that, although the crunch people are more out spoken, they are marginally less numerous than the fluff people.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

What is this "or" you speak of?

Theres so much bad crunch out there that I guess I lean slightly towards fluff, since I'm more likely to get my money's worth. If a book cant do crunch right, I'd prefer they stick to fluff. Oathbound falls into this category - great setting, but the authors just arent that good at designing mechanics.

My favorite 3.5 books are those that blend the two well. Monsternomicon, Lords of Madness, Fiendish Codex 1 and 2, etc. Books that had useful mechanics AND were great reads.

 

[Wombat]

Well, since I alter mechanics at the drop of a hat (with fair warning and a full write-up to my players), and I am in no wise "system loyal", I tend to prefer the flavour to the crunch in books. Heck, for my upcoming 7th Sea variant, I am looking at D20, GURPS, ICE, FGU, Multisim and many other companies' books and supplements for flavour material -- good flavour transcends any system.

 

[pawsplay]

The question doesn't even make sense. Without some combination of rules and setting, you don't have RPGs any more.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

If it had to be one or the other exclusively, mechanics. I can come up with my own settings far, far easier. Indeed, most of the mechanics printed in d20 books, for example, I use with entirely different flavor.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

Crunch.

For me fluff is the easy part.