The gazetteer isn't pure world-building. In fact, it's always (at least in every AP module I own or have looked through) relevant to the adventure path and almost always to the specific module. For example, A History of Ashes contains an article on the Storval Plateau and one on the Shoanti who live there; not coincidentally, that adventure takes place entirely in the Storval Plateau and the PCs will be dealing with the Shoanti a lot.
Hell, you couldn't even run some of the modules without the gazetteer sections. One of the two articles for Rivers Run Red contains the rules for building kingdoms, which is absolutely vital to the entire Kingmaker AP. The other is the writeup for Erastil, who is also important to the AP (though not vital).
|
Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.
If they were to remove the support stuff, the AP issues would just get smaller, which would cut into Paizo's profits - smaller books tend to be more expensive per page due to fixed cost IIRC.
|
I dropped my subscription at the end of Kingmaker. I wanted to explain why:
I would like more "Adventure Path" in my adventure paths. I like the forward from the editor, but I'd rather see 1 page than 2 pages. I don't like the 6 pages of fiction, and I don't like the 6+ pages of gazeteer style information (information about gods or lands), and I am not terribly fond of the 2-3 pages of advertising.
If you scrapped the gazeteer stuff and the fiction, I would be very happy and feel that I was getting my moneys worth... as it is, I sort of feel like 20% of my purchase is completely wasted.
Where I am coming from: I purchased the entire 2nd darkness path at my FLGS, and I purchased Kingmaker via subscription. I had hoped that during the time between 2nd Darkness and Kingmaker that the format may have changed a bit to cut down on the gazeteer and fiction, but sadly it was not the case.
I know some people really like the fiction and gazeteer style substance, but those people are also probably subscribing to other lines of your products... it seems out of place in an adventure path to have pure world-building information.
I'm not going to dispute your reasons for that would be silly and not particularly endearing, but I am curious why you didn't include the bestiary as equally unhelpful for running a canned adventure. The bestiary rarely contains more than one or two creatures that actually feature in the AP volume that houses them. I personally like having all the additional material(ads notwithstanding but they're a necessary evil), but it's a personal thing. The fiction always ties to the AP's setting, giving DMs a view of the setting as a living breathing environment. The supplements give necessary details, as Zurai pointed out, and I'm personally grateful I don't have to pay separately for things I may need to run the AP, like details for neighboring kingdoms.
Hopefully the smaller modules meet your needs for pure adventures, but I'm fairly certain they provide a fraction of the AP adventure content for more than half the cost of an AP volume.
Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.
They can get out more fluff but not more adventure?
|
|
Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.
If they were to remove the support stuff, the AP issues would just get smaller, which would cut into Paizo's profits - smaller books tend to be more expensive per page due to fixed cost IIRC.
That's a good point. A small volume with just adventure content like Carrion Hill costs 12.99 I think and contains 30ish pages of adventure content. An AP volume costs about 19.99 without discounts and contains 50ish pages of adventure content, not counting the bestiary or anything else.
Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.
If they were to remove the support stuff, the AP issues would just get smaller, which would cut into Paizo's profits - smaller books tend to be more expensive per page due to fixed cost IIRC.
Agreed. It's like going to a sandwich shop and saying "Could you give me 50% less bread and 50% more pastrami instead?" That's not how it works. :-)
They can get out more fluff but not more adventure?
Yes. The adventure has to be written by one person and edited by one person, but multiple articles can be written and edited in parallel by multiple people.
|
|
Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.They can get out more fluff but not more adventure?
Yes. One person writes each section. The longest is the adventure, but adding several small articles by other authors doesn't add to the primary writer's burden or, unfortunately, to the length of the adventure.
I guess I just can't see how anyone can call the gazetteers "a complete waste of space". Even the deity articles, which are almost always the most loosely associated, offer a lot of insight into the AP. I guess if you only run the APs text-as-written with absolutely nothing that isn't included in the module section, the gazetteers wouldn't be useful, but I simply cannot imagine doing that. The flavor articles are a tremendous help, I'd say essential in fact, to bringing the adventure to life. I couldn't have made Rise of the Runelords half as entertaining as it was for my players without the articles, and I stuck pretty close to the module-as-written when DMing that (it was my first long-duration campaign and my first from-a-module campaign). The extra information given in A History of Ashes allowed me to turn that module from a total train wreck of a railroad into an interesting scavenger hunt and make-nice-with-the-natives-because-they-outnumber-you-several-hundred-to-on e adventure.
|
|
The extra information given in A History of Ashes allowed me to turn that module from a total train wreck of a railroad into an interesting scavenger hunt and make-nice-with-the-natives-because-they-outnumber-you-several-hundred-to-on e adventure.
As you seem to be someone who ran Crimson Throne and found it railroady, any chance I could persuade you to post some of your changes in the Crimson Throne forum? I plan on running the rest of it after Kingmaker, but I want to convert the railroad into a sandbox in the style of Kingmaker. It sounds like you did some of that yourself using the extra info on the Shoanti.
Yes. One person writes each section. The longest is the adventure, but adding several small articles by other authors doesn't add to the primary writer's burden or, unfortunately, to the length of the adventure.Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.They can get out more fluff but not more adventure?
Then that is an organizational problem.
I guess I just can't see how anyone can call the gazetteers "a complete waste of space".
That's easy to see as he said that he doesn't even read these articles. It's easy to call something a "complete waste of space" if you don't even know what it is.
Personally, I find the articles invaluable to running the adventures most of the time, and I like the fiction as well. I'm fine with the set pieces being gone in favor of the main adventure. The AP volume are fine as they are currently, and I hope they stay that way.
|
|
Then that is an organizational problem.Yes. One person writes each section. The longest is the adventure, but adding several small articles by other authors doesn't add to the primary writer's burden or, unfortunately, to the length of the adventure.Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.They can get out more fluff but not more adventure?
More a methodology problem. They purposely give the full adventure to a single author so it maintains the atmosphere throughout and feels unified. There's only so much one person can do in the time allotted before it gets passed to the editors, who then unify the adventure with the others in the series. I suspect they could divide the adventure article and get more content, but I don't think the quality would be consistent. As it is, people sometimes feel like entire chapters of the AP don't mesh with the rest.
I realize I'm speaking with authority on things that I'm purely speculating on, so I add this sentence as a disclaimer in the hopes that James Jacobs doesn't smite me for the assumptions.
If that's all you want why don't you just buy something like War of the Burning Sky, the Modules, or Shackled City
Personally, I find the articles invaluable to running the adventures most of the time,
Not only are the articles often very useful (or even necessary) in terms of running the adventure itself, but they also offer a lot of insight into the world of Golarion that will be useful for all adventures set in that campaign setting rather than just the specific adventure.
Personally, I really love the deity articles and the bestiary sections. I wouldn't want to lose them :)
Chief Technical Officer
|
More a methodology problem.Then that is an organizational problem.They can get out more fluff but not more adventure?Yes. One person writes each section. The longest is the adventure, but adding several small articles by other authors doesn't add to the primary writer's burden or, unfortunately, to the length of the adventure.
Whatever kind of problem you wish to call it, it's not something that you can just get around.
Just think about what it takes to edit a page of adventure versus a page of fluff.
Adventures have character builds that have to be verified, which involves math and spell lists that have to be checked and rechecked. Location descriptions have to be compared to maps. Somebody has to ensure that everything that needs a stat block has a stat block, and that every location on a map has description, and vice-versa. We have to ensure that characters don't switch gender, races, class, or level throughout the whole of an adventure, and that their names and titles are spelled the same each time they're mentioned. We have to verify that the text and the art don't contradict one another. Adventure text blocks also have lots of special formatting that has to be applied and checked. And that's just some of what has to be done in addition to regular spelling-and-grammar editing.
Support materials are generally prose-heavy, meaning there's less math to check. And while internal consistency is still important, it's a lot easier to achieve that over five pages than 50.
In short, an editor might spend the same amount of time on one chapter of back matter as on one single page—or even one single complicated stat block—in the adventure.
I really like the support articles. I want to possibly play in some of the APs, so I only read about half of them (I've read Second Darkness, Legacy of Fire, and Kingmaker). The others I save on the off chance I'll get to play in one someday. So the support articles are what I read when say, a new Serpent Skull issue comes out. Sometimes there are minor spoilers, but for the most part they can be quite handy as a GM.
I love the Bestiary section. I don't see how a GM can discount that as not useful. They are perfect for flavorful monsters when the PCs go off track. I get the most use out of that section, and would love to see it (or any of the support articles) expanded a bit. Particularly if the sample characters are dropped.
It would be a lot easier for Paizo to do an anthology of adventures (say, 3 adventures in an issue like Dungeon.) Then it wouldn't be an AP anymore though, it'd just be a collection of adventures. There are way more sources for those.
So while I think the format could use a little tweaking, I'm a very satisfied customer.
I'll be dropping some subscriptions due to income shifts in our family recently combined with having more materials than I can store.
But, I have to say, I agree with the OP. The serialized fiction strikes me as a self-indulgent inclusion; it adds nothing to the experience for me. The ads are also annoying and I can hardly imagine that they're remotely effective. I like the pieces on locations or peoples, although it's done better in standalone products, but you need it to run the modules so there it is.
|
Creative Director
|
Thanks for the feedback... BUT. The Adventure Path is VERY UNLIKELY to change its format for two major reasons. Warning: This is gonna be a sizable post.
1) With it's current format, which has remained relatively unchanged at about 50% adventure, 50% support material, this product has been our flagship product line. Simply put, it's the one that, over the past three years, has made us the most money. The RPG hardcover lines are gaining fast, but the Adventure Path, as it stands right now, is PHENOMENALLY successful. I am very wary about making extensive changes to its contents, as a result, and even if I did want to, say, turn it into something that was 75% adventure and 25% support material, I don't think my bosses would let me.
But frankly, that's not the main reason it won't change. The main reason is this one:
2) The Adventure Path is a monthly product. That means we effectively have one month to make each one go from the raw text turnover to the final product. This takes several people—each person takes one portion and does their job with that portion. This speaks a bit to what Vic said above. We can certainly split up the editing duties for an adventure... but we cannot split up the development duties for an adventure. An adventure is one of the most complex products we produce, because it not only has to have all the rules working the right way, it also has to have all the story elements working the right way AND those rules and story elements have to work the right way with 5 other equally large installments. That means one person AT A MINIMUM needs to do an entire development pass—for the same reason that if you're reading a story, you need one person to read the entire story. If you split the job of reading a novel up among two or four people, then none of the people involved will get an accurate view of the entire thing.
Now this is where the laws of physics come in to play. I've developed adventures pretty much for about 7 years now as my job, and in that time I've come to some pretty strong conclusions about how long it takes someone to develop an adventure. And that basically boils down to, on average, about 15,000 words of development per week (this can vary, depending upon the skill of the writer, but we're talking averages here). At 50 pages long, an adventure path installment is about 35,000 words. So as a result, it basically takes just over 2 weeks to develop a 50 page adventure. That leaves less than 2 weeks to layout the adventure and to edit it thoroughly—trust me, that's not a lot of time.
Since we're pretty much stuck with a monthly schedule for AP installments, that basically means that for every additional page we add to an adventure, that's time we take AWAY from that adventure's graphic design and its editing... which is bad, considering that the adventure is getting BIGGER. So, basically, we'd be forcing our art director and our editors to lay out and edit a LONGER project with LESS time. It's a case of rapidly diminishing returns.
At a length of about 50 pages, we're right on the far edge of the "sweet spot" of what can realistically be done for a monthly adventure product... and if we get hit wit an author's work that's unexpectedly sub par, then we quickly fall behind. And when Pathfinder APs fall behind, the ramifications are MUCH more dire than customers having to wait extra long for their next volume, or having to pay for two volumes in one month. The ripple effect on our print schedules and cash flow and production schedules when Pathfinder gets far off schedule can quickly become catastrophic.
So, to summarize:
The adventures in Pathfinder are the length they are because that's the maximum length an adventure can be if it's on a monthly schedule.
Adding more staff would not help, because of the fundamental fact that one person needs to do the development of each adventure.
The only way we could do a longer adventure in each Adventure Path would be to switch to a different release schedule; something like one every 2 months or one every 3 months. And that isn't going to happen—that would probably kill the product line entirely.
The fiction, the support articles, and the bestiary are in Pathfinder APs not only because they help to support the adventure. They're there because 50 pages is more or less the maximum length adventure we can produce on a monthly schedule, and we want these books to be 96 pages long. By putting support material in there that helps GMs who want to expand the adventure, but that don't SPECIFICALLY REQUIRE someone to be 100% familiar with the adventure itself to write or develop... we can make it happen.
|
Creative Director
|
Then that is an organizational problem.Yes. One person writes each section. The longest is the adventure, but adding several small articles by other authors doesn't add to the primary writer's burden or, unfortunately, to the length of the adventure.Also, in the many times this has come up before, it's been said that they couldn't get more adventure into the book and get it out monthly. The writing/editing/development manpower just isn't there.They can get out more fluff but not more adventure?
As I pointed out in my last long post... it's NOT an organization problem.
It's a result of a monthly schedule. There's a hard and fast physical limit to the number of pages that can be developed in a single "unit" of adventure in a single month.
An adventure that's longer is certainly possible, but it'd take too long to develop to maintain a monthly release schedule.
And splitting the development duty on an adventure isn't an option, any more than splitting the reading duty on a novel is really an option.
|
Creative Director
|
And a little more...
We CAN have multiple authors work on an adventure. We've done that before. We do it again (most recently on Pathfinder #39's "City of Seven Spears.") Obviously it's good to have only one person write an adventure, but for an RPG adventure, it's not the author's job to ensure that there's one common "voice" for an adventure, or that what happens in the front is logically attached to what happens in the middle or the end. That's the developer's job.
But the fact remains, that at SOME POINT along an adventure's creation cycle, one person needs to go through it with a fine-toothed-comb from the first word to the last word. And the thing that limits the length of Adventure Path adventures to 50 some pages is the fact that THAT person, on a monthly schedule, can't really do more than 50 some pages a month and still leave enough time for an army of art directors and editors to do the rest of the job.
and if we get hit wit an author's work that's unexpectedly sub par, then we quickly fall behind.
Out of interest: Has this ever happened (with Pathfinder or with Dungeon) while you've worked on adventure development?
|
Creative Director
|
Final post for now, I promise.
Adventure paths are more than 1 adventure. They're 6 adventures that need to work together to form a coherent whole. And since it takes about 2–3 months to write one 50 page adventure, we OBVIOUSLY need to have multiple writers working in parallel in order to get 6 adventures done in 6 months.
And here again is where the developer's job becomes a sort of "bottleneck." The developer (usually me, but with Serpent's Skull it's Rob McCreary) is the FIRST one who has the big picture and gets to read EVERY ADVENTURE.
All of these posts come down to the same thing, really, I guess. And that's the simple fact that we make each adventure in an AP as long as physically possible, given the monthly schedule. If you want longer adventures, I can certainly empathize and understand that desire... but it can't be done on a monthly schedule. Not without forcing the poor developer to work 80+ hour weeks for 6 months. A developer will have a nervous breakdown long before the 6 months pass, and then we'd be stuck with having to put a NEW developer on the job halfway through, which would basically be asking him to do the same job that just broke the previous developer but with much less time.
|
Creative Director
|
and if we get hit wit an author's work that's unexpectedly sub par, then we quickly fall behind.Out of interest: Has this ever happened (with Pathfinder or with Dungeon) while you've worked on adventure development?
Yes. Every adventure path has had this happen. Most have had it happen 2 to 3 times. Some have had it happen in almost every adventure. I've had to rewrite several adventures over the past seven years, in fact. (AND: No, I'm not going to say which ones.)
And I'm not saying that the authors suck. Far from it.
I'm saying that even the BEST author can't do his best job every time. And that no one gets adventure writing right the first time out. And that no adventure writer gets writing for an adventure path installment right the first time out.
But the fact that we HAVE been able to more or less keep a monthly schedule speaks more to the fact that the vast majority of our authors are VERY good at their job.
I guess I am just a fanboi because...I look back over the last 26 years since I started gaming (I think I am still about 7 or so years shy of being a true grognard though)...and look at the adventures churned out in the eighties (what 30-ish pages each? and most of them suck diddely ucked). Then you go to the drought of the 90's as TSR slowly collapsed like a flan in a cupboard...then you hit the implementation of 3rd edition and aside from umpteen billion splat books with horrendous editting errors how many adventures did WotC put out? The answer to that question is that they left adventures mostly to third party folks. A little magazine called Dungeon (Savage Tide, Age of Worms and Shackled City ring any bells?).
Now as we head into the teen years of this century you have the little company that could shouldering a burdon that for all intents and purposes should crush them. They not only keep the dream alive on our game store shelves, but they f00king dish out quality goods left and right and they have completed a number of full fledged campaigns, society adventures AND stand-alone modules because they are completely smashed off their arses insane...The sheer prolific pile of awesome should be enough to choke the living daylights out of all of you.
Now as to the OP, well I can't comment on the likes and dislikes because that's all opinion. But as far as the "zomg me wunt morz venturz gaiz"...I will have to find a way to teleport you back in time when you actually had to write your own g.d. adventure if you wanted to play each week.
Sure what is supplied may not hit the spot for you, and that's a legit opinion to have any time you spend money on a hobby. But to come here and claim that a 50page adventure each month is lacking in depth and crunch or that the Paizo crew is somehow lazing about to "fluff" up their page content...well my comment there would probably get me moderated...
Adventure Paths are what got me hooked on Pathfinder in the first place. The AP concept is a brilliant one. I hope Paizo keeps to its winning formula. There will always be some gamers who will be unsatisified with the format and that is inevitable. Nevertheless, James Jacobs mentioned that the AP's are 'PHENOMENALLY successful' so they must be very popular with the majority of Pathfinder customers. So in my humble opinion, keep up the great work and don't change the AP's.
|
|
Thank you, Mr. Jacobs, for demonstrating why Paizo deserves every Ennie it received. Vic Wertz did a fair job answering for why more adventure just wouldn't work on a monthly schedule, but for you to personally take the time to explain says that Paizo is something no other company can touch.
I am grateful I was not smote for speaking out of my rear on Paizo's behalf.
"Gazetteer" and fiction worthless? Can't get my mind around it.
Where does an adventure take place but in a "world"?
"Gazetteer" and fiction worthless? Can't get my mind around it.
Where does an adventure take place but in a "world"?
Well, for a GM's homebrew campaign the Golarion-specific stuff might be of limited use. I wouldn't say "worthless", though.
|
"Gazetteer" and fiction worthless? Can't get my mind around it.
Where does an adventure take place but in a "world"?
While I won’t claim to completely understand the OP’s objection (I, like others, am very glad for the gazette articles and fiction, they really help with running the adventures and understanding the setting) I can imagine they would be somewhat less useful to someone who was using the adventures as one shots, or setting them in a homebrew setting.
Well, for a GM's homebrew campaign the Golarion-specific stuff might be of limited use. I wouldn't say "worthless", though."Gazetteer" and fiction worthless? Can't get my mind around it.
Where does an adventure take place but in a "world"?
Sure. But to dicker over words a bit, sounds like what one wants at that point is more of a module than an adventure. An adventure without a setting, or an implied generic setting, sounds more like what I'd call a module than an adventure. I'm suggesting a distinction in terms, btw, not assuming that the usage is universal.
EDIT: Mothman, yeah, sounds like a job for a module. People other than Paizo writes them. (They call them modules, but aren't they really locations? Locations in Golarion that you could adapt for somewhere else.)
Thanks for posting your insight into the process James, and keep up the good (and hard!) work.
Yeah, those posts are always particularly interesting and informative.
|
|
Sure. But to dicker over words a bit, sounds like what one wants at that point is more of a module than an adventure. An adventure without a setting, or an implied generic setting, sounds more like what I'd call a module than an adventure. I'm suggesting a distinction in terms, btw, not assuming that the usage is universal.
EDIT: Mothman, yeah, sounds like a job for a module. People other than Paizo writes them. (They call them modules, but aren't they really locations? Locations in Golarion that you could adapt for somewhere else.)
Didn’t mean to jump on you Mairkurion, cross-posting with Hogarth like that.
Like I said, I don’t agree with the OP ... but if I were looking for high quality, well written, linked adventures / modules / campaign / adventure paths (whatever you like to call them) but wished to set them in FR or Eberron or a homebrew world (which is all quite do-able), I might find the gazette articles and Golarion fiction far less useful. Unfortunately, as I am not aware of too many other companies who publish monthly, high quality, well written, linked adventures (etc) apart from Paizo, I would not have many other options, and thus might appeal to Paizo to consider cutting the stuff I don’t find useful.
Fortunately for myself, I buy the APs to read, and to set in Golarion when I do get to run them, and find the support material, fiction etc immensely enjoyable.
No, no...no jumping. Just discussing.
Yeah, they sucked me into their excellent world...like I needed another one. And now I don't want to homebrew their stuff to keep the settings distinct.
But on the other hand, I could also see myself wanting to read their stuff, just too see really well done stuff and how it's done. I mean, I won't name any names, but I can think of another company, who has not recently been known for building great stuff, in my opinion, but I read something of theirs that's largely not of use to me, and did find one well done element that I immediately yoinked. I guess I don't go looking for adventures to take over. I look for something more like what I'd call a module, and often those require a lot of work to fix, which is irksome. If I'm not in a hurry, I'd rather make build my own, and if I am in a hurry, I want something that doesn't need fixing. But if that were a part of an AP, I don't think I'd complain about the other material. The AP is what it is. Paizo's created a previously undiscovered Platonic form...except for, say a couple of pages we could wrestle over. (And I guess I don't need to say which pages are not included in those for me. :D)
EDIT: I think I gave into rambling. Sorry.
I would prefer no fiction but I like the rest of the stuff in the AP.
Edit: Thanks James/Vic for the answers on all of this I have no real problem with the odd thing I find uninteresting amongst all the stuff I like.
Please keep AP's no. 1 ( I am not a huge fan of the rulebooks)
I own nearly every AP module so far and I love the concept and I love most of the adventures. But I´ve never read any single story. For our homebrew campaign the fiction is nearly worthless as "background material" and many stories have nothing to do with the AP plot. I´d like to see the fiction dropped. But...
I work at a newspaper (in Germany), I know that not everything printed is for everyone, so the current AP format is all right with me.
|
The AP's are unbelivably good. All of it is good. I read the fiction, I run the adventures, it's just all great.
OK some bits are not as popular as others but I am sure James can go look at the sales figures as proof that they must be doing something right.
Oh and Hook Mountain Massacre on Amazon.co.uk? £83.89. ($131.16 if you are American). That right there is demand in action!
Keep up the good work.
(Oh btw does anyone have Hook Mountain Massacre available for say £15 :))
Thanks Mr. Jacobs, for the feedback.
I am sure I will get slammed for this, but here goes:
I would feel better about buying the pathfinders at the same price, at a lower page count, without the fiction or gazeteer material. It doesn't make sense emperically, because I should just be able to ignore the extra stuff that I don't read... but nevertheless it makes me feel bad to see it.Here's an analogy: I am allergic to lettuce. When I go to a restraunt and a salad is served with my dinner. I have no problem paying full price for an entree and asking the server to "Hold the salad". When I forget to ask to hold the salad, and it is delivered to me, I feel a little bad knowing that it is just going to be thrown away (especially if it is a gorgeous Ceasar salad with croutons and chunks of chicken, or a baby-greens salad with walnuts and mandarin oranges). In the same way, I feel bad looking at the last 1/3 of my APs, knowing that it is completely going to waste.
That makes sense. I'd stick with the sandwich metaphor I referred to earlier: you don't like a lot of bread with your sandwich, but you can't expect them to slice the bread thinner just for you, and at any rate the sandwich wouldn't be any cheaper.
|
|
If that's all you want why don't you just buy something like War of the Burning Sky, the Modules, or Shackled CityI own war of the burning sky in hardcover, shackled city in hardcover, almost every module by goodman games and almost every module by Necromancer Games.
I love adventures and I buy them by the fistful. I NEVER purchase sourcebooks, splatbooks, gazeteers, or fantasy fiction, with the exception of a few Bestiaries (Tome of Horrors, Tome of Horrors 2, and WoTC MM3 & MM4). After MM4 I have abandoned buying bestiaries.
I have only purchased the 2nd darkness AP (all 6 issues) and the Kingmaker AP (all 6 issues). It seems to me that those are representative of the line and that $200 in purchases has been enough to give me a pretty informed opnion of what I like and dislike of the series. One of the 2nd darkness gazeteers had what seemed like 12+ pages devoted to all kinds of demon lords, and to me that was pretty useless. I haven't read more than 1 page of the fiction in any AP, and I've only read about 1/3 of the gazeteer style information.
As many posters have surmized, I run homebrew games and thus the gazeteer material is particularly wasted on me.
I've read all of what you have to say, and one thought keeps running through my head, "Your loss."
I don't say this to be mean or snarky. I honestly mean it. I feel that you are missing out on some amazing material. Also I would note that as far as the community at large seems to feel the two APs you have purchased are outliers, either unique, like Kingmaker, or less popular, in the case of Second Darkness which I look forward to running or playing in. Of course the other AP's have the same formula as far as Adventure vs. Gazeteer/Fiction/Bestiary. But without the non-Adventure part I would not be a subscriber. I don't run often enough to use every AP and I don't buy adventures to have them sit on the shelf. I don't have enough money. Just my two cents worth.
Graywulfe