Cards vs chart

I've seen this topic cone up a few times and I've searched through those threads, but I haven't seen anything really useful to me, thus I am throwing the question out there in hopes of gaining some insight.

So, the game involves skill checks to overcome challenges. There are 8 different skills. In order to roll the check you roll dice equal to your skill rating plus modifiers, but no more than 6 dice can ever be rolled.

For the chart, that means 8 charts with 7 entries (0 successes to 6 successes). The chart would describe the benefits of success (meaning more successes rolled means greater benefits on the skill check).

The cards, on the other hand, would be a success deck and a failure deck. If you pass the check, regardless of by how much, you draw a card to see specific results. The same goes for failure.

Pros and Cons
The way I see it, the charts allow for more specific bonuses gained. They also encourage players to develop their skills in order to obtain better rewards more consistently. They also provide fewer parts - an extra page or two in the rule book as opposed to 60 or 80 more cards (the game currently already has 2 decks of cards in it).

By contrast, the success or failure cards can grant random rewards, reflecting more serendipity than skill. It would mean you are good enough to get the job done, but factors outside your control have contributed to the consequence of your action. I believe the cards will also grant more flavor to the game, and I think that flavor will entice people to play more than the chart. Cards can also make for smoother game play with less consulting charts. They are, however, less specific and would have to be written as essentially reward +1 sort of things.

I'm not sure which way to go on it. Prototype work and cost aren't issues. Only the mechanics and feel of the game are issues right now.

Thanks for your thoughts

Mike