Mechanics or story?

[painandgreed]

If only the Shadowrun mechanics were 1/10th as good as the Setting...

See, much like Rifts, I was the other way around. I found the mechanics passable (for the time period they came out) and had problems with setting. Not that I didn't modify or not use parts of the mechanics I found distastful, but still I have issues with both systems settings.

 

[RFisher]

To be a productive company, I think you need to produce both. To not have both is to neglect a potential audience.

I don't know. Sometimes it's better to focus on what you do well & let other companies serve the other segments of the market. I think I'd rather be known as "the company that doesn't do crunch" than "the company that does bad crunch". (Or the other way 'round.)

 

[Shade]

Mechanics. I can find plenty of inspiration for story elsewhere.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I think I'd rather be known as "the company that doesn't do crunch" than "the company that does bad crunch". (Or the other way 'round.)

Well, this is obviously true, also. But I would imagine that anyone who is seriously going into publishing could find someone who can get you over the level of "bad" and solidly into "acceptable." [And this next bit may be unrealistic on my part] But I would hope that the worst case scenario is more the case of being the company whose "crunch is awesome and their fluff is passable" or the other way around. In truth, that's about where I'd put most companies. One or the other is awesome, whill the other is passable but not as awesome as the first.