You're on the right track by asking and talking about doing what most people will use.
I was thinking of this the other day while browsing through some old Warpstone issues (where the scenarios drive me nuts because there is no "adventure synopsis," which is standard for modern scenarios for ease of GM planning)..but it got me thinking about this very topic. I know you guys have already put work into the Grunberg town issue (and we appreciate that), but I'd stop and move right to the scenarios. Here's why:
I think you guys are wasting your time without spending 95% on what the audience WILL use and not on what they "could" use. If I was heading up the project, I'd do the same and be asking 100 prospective WFRP'ers a questions with specific answers (and I wouldn't go until I had a bunch of responses).
We have limited time and effort, which model would you REALLY use?
A) * Scenario(s) with rough details on background of a NEW (undeveloped) town and NPCs
B) * No scenario with extended details on a NEW (undeveloped) town, organizations, and NPCs
C) * Scenario(s) in an EXISTING town (e.g. Ubersreik, Hulgedal, Faulgeimere), with rough expansion of existing locations, NPCs, organizations
D) * No scenario, with extended details on an EXISTING town, organizations, npcs.
E) Just a town map with some numbered locations, a sentence or two on each location, with the name of an NPC and his career and a sentence or two on each NPC.
E) * None of the above, I don't really use fan stuff
My vote is for "A" or C. As a GM, the MOST valuable thing to me is a scenario with only rough details of a town and it's NPCs. If you had to split your time between creating 10 hours of reading fluff for a baker/cultist-candlestick maker shops OR two sentences on the baker's shop and full-fledged scenario instead, I'll choose the LATTER every time. Now, seven people who don't have lives (no offense to you people like me without lives) will come out of the woodwork to say, "oh, I really want the marriage and birthing customs of Kislevian termites traveling the lands of the Hung fully detailed with 8x10 glossy pictures," but let's be realistic..what's useful to the majority?
IMHO, the work of Liber Fanatica is appreciated ONLY by the GMs and they are thinking about running campaigns. A village is only a stop-off point . Players certainly don't read it (because they don't know if their GM is even going to allow it in the first place), and GMs, by and large, can use a new scenario 85% of the time and the background 15% of the time when it comes fan-produced material. We're going to marvel at it for 10 minutes and then it's going to sit on someone's hard drive gathering Tron-Dust in the forgotten 'could have used' pile.
Where should we put our efforts? Scenarios, with rough background. Since I'm on the topic: Adventure hooks for locations be damned! They are not useful out of the context of a scenario imho and would be much better placed in sidebars of a FULL scenario or series as 'optional extra encounters rather than just taking up space randomly in some location or NPC detail. These would also be best defined as one-pagers for side-adventures/hooks rather than the chintzy-lazy 1 paragraph that usually get's relegated to adventure hooks. Don't bother if it's just an idea. WE GMs have boatloads of ideas. We need developed scenarios.
Regarding Scenarios: I would rather see SIX 20-page (one-two night) scenarios that can be linked rather than a giant 45 page scenario with no adventure synopsis and a behemoth of reading. Even if it's a 3-act (3-6 night structure), I'd still rather see them able to be broken up..and please, for the love of all that is decent in the modern scenario-writing-world, please, please, please include an Adventure Synopsis in the front of the scenario so we GMs can quickly evaluate the flow and idea of a scenario to see if it fits in our campaign (rather than having to read a whole scenario to figure out what it's about).
We appreciate your work. Focus on the scenarios.
Best of luck,