Castle Eras and Factions

[Robert8]

I agree that KK2 is the worst when to accurate design comes, but it was just a different take on the Caslte theme. Castle is an evergreen LEGO theme and they need to reinvent it frequently to keep it fresh. Otherwise, it would be way too repetitive.

KK2 was a Castle theme more focused on action, just like Castle 2007 was more focused to fantasy.

[Rogue Angel]

I agree that Knights were surely colorful but they would have had colorful tabards, not armor. You could say that the colored Armor piece could be acceptable, saying that this included the tabard, but then the torso and legs should be gray, not red/purple/green/light blue, etc.

Upon rereading the catalogs, I see that the Black Knights and the Dragon Masters are technically separate factions, but they are really just the same faction with different colors. I used Dragon Masters as the faction name as it is more obvious as to who it refers to. I may rename them, but still have them connected in the flow chart.

I was going through my figs this weekend, and was noticing how completely different the original Crusaders are from the Kingdoms Lions. I was looking primarily at the shields when I made this up, but I'm thinking I have to separate them out.

I found my old mini catalogs and uploaded the pictures for reference.

[thetang22]

I see that the Black Knights and the Dragon Masters are technically separate factions, but they are really just the same faction with different colors. I used Dragon Masters as the faction name as it is more obvious as to who it refers to. I may rename them, but still have them connected in the flow chart.

I have to disagree. The shield is about the only similarity between the two factions. Once you get passed the shield, Black Knights and Dragon Masters were quite different, from a visual standpoint. Add to that, they existed at THE SAME TIME as opposing factions, and that pretty much cements that they are indeed 2 different factions.

[Hive]

The Crusader shields were amazing. I'd love to see them re-issued.

[Rogue Angel]

I have to disagree. The shield is about the only similarity between the two factions. Once you get passed the shield, Black Knights and Dragon Masters were quite different, from a visual standpoint. Add to that, they existed at THE SAME TIME as opposing factions, and that pretty much cements that they are indeed 2 different factions.

The crest is what defines a faction though, and the dragon Torsos for the Dragon Masters fit in perfectly with the Black Knights. The thing about the Black Knights is that they were undefined other than their shields and helmets. They used generic armor prints that had no faction crest, and again, the helmets from the Black Knights fit the Dragon Lords perfectly. The crusaders have the blue shields and the yellow shields, but they only have one faction.

I still say they are really just one faction, despite the Lego 'lore'. If anything, the Dragon Masters are a splinter faction of the Black Knights that were led by the Power-hungry renegade Majisto who used his control over the Dragons to maintain his power. I would still consider this one over-arcing faction though.

[Lind Whisperer]

I think what it all boils down to, is that LEGO just needs to hire someone to sit down and write a couple of books that officially, once and for all, say who's what, when, and where for all themes.

I, of course, suggest myself as the best possible candidate for the job.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Lind Whisperer

[dgherko]

I think a castle book would be a great idea. The star wars books are well done, but the history of Lego Castle goes back to the beginning of lego minifigures themselves. The first horses were built from bricks.

As for the black knight faction I just like the look of the torso marching under the faction flag of a blue dragon in front of a yellow background. Unique from the green dragon shield of the dragon masters.

I only pine for an actual monarch for the black knight faction an owner for the "Black Monarch's Castle" 6085.

[Artanis I]

No they shouldn't write a book. It should be whatever people want it to be. That is the whole point of creativity: YOU write the story.

If Bobby wants to lump all his dragon soldiers in together that is up to him, if Timmy has it another way that's up to him. I have my way, it follows certain logic according to the minifigs appearance, the castles they appear in and the accessories they used, but others use their own logic to come up with slightly different outcomes, as evidenced by this and the 3 other similar conversations this year already. This is one of the cases in life where there is no "1 correct answer".

TLG: just make cool sets & minifigs, let us make up our own stories, characters & alliances.

[amechanicalmind]

No they shouldn't write a book. It should be whatever people want it to be. That is the whole point of creativity: YOU write the story.

If Bobby wants to lump all his dragon soldiers in together that is up to him, if Timmy has it another way that's up to him. I have my way, it follows certain logic according to the minifigs appearance, the castles they appear in and the accessories they used, but others use their own logic to come up with slightly different outcomes, as evidenced by this and the 3 other similar conversations this year already. This is one of the cases in life where there is no "1 correct answer".

TLG: just make cool sets & minifigs, let us make up our own stories, characters & alliances.

^This times a million. I don't need a company telling me how I (or my kids) need to think about or play with a toy. I like the ambiguity. I can make the story, the good or bad guys (or have just good guys, just bad guys, or various mixtures - as in real life) Heck, I didn't even realize there were all these pseudo names for classic factions I used to play with as a kid (black falcons, black knights, and crusaders) that have been extrapolated by fans until coming out of my own dark ages a couple of years ago.

[Lind Whisperer]

No they shouldn't write a book. It should be whatever people want it to be. That is the whole point of creativity: YOU write the story.

If Bobby wants to lump all his dragon soldiers in together that is up to him, if Timmy has it another way that's up to him. I have my way, it follows certain logic according to the minifigs appearance, the castles they appear in and the accessories they used, but others use their own logic to come up with slightly different outcomes, as evidenced by this and the 3 other similar conversations this year already. This is one of the cases in life where there is no "1 correct answer".

TLG: just make cool sets & minifigs, let us make up our own stories, characters & alliances.

The thing is, Timmy and Bobby are going to play the way they want to play whether there is a book or not. A book like this would be a book aimed towards AFOLs, for the sole purpose of settling arguments like "Should Black Knights and Dragon Masters be grouped together," etc. You are still free to have your own opinion, and to use your sets to come up with your own stories, but there is a sizeable portion of the FOL fandom who would like to have a book that settles these arguments.

^This times a million. I don't need a company telling me how I (or my kids) need to think about or play with a toy.

Again, you're not being told how to think or how to play. This is for people who want an official canon to settle arguments against.

I like the ambiguity. I can make the story, the good or bad guys (or have just good guys, just bad guys, or various mixtures - as in real life) Heck, I didn't even realize there were all these pseudo names for classic factions I used to play with as a kid (black falcons, black knights, and crusaders) that have been extrapolated by fans until coming out of my own dark ages a couple of years ago.

Again, a sizable portion of the fans don't like the ambiguity, and they would prefer an official ruling on these debates.

This is the same problem as with The LEGO Movie, when it criticized people who like to glue their displays. People like to play in different ways, and all of those ways are "correct". You like to make up your own stories for your characters, I like to consult a canon and build from there. Both methods are correct.

Your freedom to make up your own stories would only be limited by a canon if you let it be limited. This are the LEGO Universes, after all - even in the murky realm of existing canon, there are countless realities, canons, universes, and timelines. If anything, having an official canon would expand the possibilities that imagination could build upon, not diminish them!

Edited March 19, 2015 by Lind Whisperer

[amechanicalmind]

The thing is...I grew up playing with these and classic castle when there wasn't a story with these factions, they weren't even named. There was no canon because there was no story...I made the story! In my opinion (which is as valid as yours, which I can appreciate), there is no need to retroactively decide on a canon. It's revisionist history and I feel diminishes the value of imaginitive, original, and creative play by having a ready made story. Why the need to be "correct" and settle arguments all the time, internet?

[Artanis I]

The thing is, Timmy and Bobby are going to play the way they want to play whether there is a book or not. A book like this would be a book aimed towards AFOLs, for the sole purpose of settling arguments like "Should Black Knights and Dragon Masters be grouped together," etc. You are still free to have your own opinion, and to use your sets to come up with your own stories, but there is a sizeable portion of the FOL fandom who would like to have a book that settles these arguments.

Again, you're not being told how to think or how to play. This is for people who want an official canon to settle arguments against.

Again, a sizable portion of the fans don't like the ambiguity, and they would prefer an official ruling on these debates.

So do what I and others do, MAKE THE OFFICIAL RULING YOURSELF. If the only person you bind the book's 'official' canon to is yourself (by saying that anyone else can do what they want), why do you need someone to tell you what that is? Use your own brain or imagination. Who are you settling arguments against, and why? This isn't Star Wars or some other fixed licenced theme, everything is up for interpretation, and it's refreshing to have Lego themes that are like that for a change.

Your Lego, your rules.

[Robert8]

I'd like to see a book but I'm not interested in storylines...

I'd prefer to see:

- A photographic compilation of all the castle themes so far

- Some stuff about the design process of each theme

- Themes/sets ideas they never made

And the mandatory exclusive minifigure...

Edited March 20, 2015 by Robert8

[Artanis I]

I'd like to see a book but I'm not interested in storylines...

- A photographic compilation of all the castle themes so far

- Some stuff about the design process of each theme

- Themes/sets ideas they never made

And the mandatory exclusive minifigure...

Imagine BL & eBay sellers trying to get rid of heaps of minifig-less books to recover the cost of army-building it!

[amechanicalmind]

I'd like to see a book but I'm not interested in storylines...

- A photographic compilation of all the castle themes so far

- Some stuff about the design process of each theme

- Themes/sets ideas they never made

And the mandatory exclusive minifigure...

Agreed. Castle is now 36 years old (older if counting the Weetabix), we could really use a good reference book at this point.

Imagine BL & eBay sellers trying to get rid of heaps of minifig-less books to recover the cost of army-building it!

Perfect! I've gotten quite a few $2 Lego books from those guys already.

[Captain Fortune]

Where are the Black Knights? Am I wrong or did you mix them with the Dragon Masters?

[thetang22]

Where are the Black Knights? Am I wrong or did you mix them with the Dragon Masters?

They are labeled as "Dragon Knights" in Classic Castle (since their emblem was the first Dragon Emblem)...and the only "dragon" faction that really existed in Classic Castle (even thought Dragon Masters were sort of a bridge between old and new at the time).

[Captain Fortune]

They are labeled as "Dragon Knights" in Classic Castle (since their emblem was the first Dragon Emblem)...and the only "dragon" faction that really existed in Classic Castle (even thought Dragon Masters were sort of a bridge between old and new at the time).

I see, but it's still illogical to consider them a single faction. Why "dragon knights/dragon masters"? Why not "dwarfs/falcons"? Tha'ts absurd, even more when Masters and Blacks were enemies in 1993-1994.

Edited November 4, 2015 by Captain Fortune

[Murrig Icehammer]

Having dwarves is just THE plus point of the Fantasy Era.

Otherwise I was quite happy with the initial knights when they first came out.

The castles have lost some of their initial attraction ... while something like "medieval market" is just outstanding, recent castles are especially poor in terms of wall structure (compare to Helms deep!).

I couldn't agree more!

I really loved the Fantasy theme, especially since it wasn't so much over the top that it would restrict ones options to make it either more down to earth or even more high fantasy -like.

PLUS it wasn't bound to a specific francise so it was much more open for interpretation and could be filled with the builders own imagination IMO.

PLUS sets where less expensive!

If it where up to me they should have continued that line until now and longer. :)

EDIT:

On Topic -

I never really cared about the factions when i was a kid.

(i didn't even know they had names and a backstory before the internet, lol.)

And now since i'm a old geezer, i couldn't care less about any canon differences ppl have on the internet (i was too long engaged in Star Trek stuff to let my fun cut by other ppls opinion again.) To me Lego always where just a tool for my stories, not the other way around.

Edited November 4, 2015 by Murrig Icehammer

[aakos12]

I agree that Knights were surely colorful but they would have had colorful tabards, not armor. You could say that the colored Armor piece could be acceptable, saying that this included the tabard, but then the torso and legs should be gray, not red/purple/green/light blue, etc.

Upon rereading the catalogs, I see that the Black Knights and the Dragon Masters are technically separate factions, but they are really just the same faction with different colors. I used Dragon Masters as the faction name as it is more obvious as to who it refers to. I may rename them, but still have them connected in the flow chart.

I was going through my figs this weekend, and was noticing how completely different the original Crusaders are from the Kingdoms Lions. I was looking primarily at the shields when I made this up, but I'm thinking I have to separate them out.

I found my old mini catalogs and uploaded the pictures for reference.

It's interesting to see these old catalogs, also, the summary of the lines looks interesting! Do you think the summary can vary region by region? I can see here sets which I've never seen in my country's catalogs (e.g. 6079, 6046, 6071) and it's not familiar to me either that the newer Forestmen were placed against the Crusaders. I'll need to take a look at my old catalogs when I get home.

[x105Black]

Where are the Black Knights? Am I wrong or did you mix them with the Dragon Masters?

I think of Dragon Masters as a continuation of Black Knights. Their fighting was more of a civil war, internal. But speaking of combined factions, I found it odd that there are 2 different Lion factions listed.

I agree, I think it makes fine sense as is. Crusaders/Lion Knights are the same faction. Lots of factions have more than 1 torso design.

Crusaders and Lions are the same faction. I always considered all of the Lions to be the same faction, from the original Lion Shield in "Town Square - Castle Scene" (1592-1) through to today. And to be honest, I always thought of the Crown faction as the same faction, too.

So basically, ALL Dragons belong to the Dragon faction, and ALL Lions / Crowns belong to the Lion faction.

I agree that KK2 is the worst when to accurate design comes, but it was just a different take on the Caslte theme. Castle is an evergreen LEGO theme and they need to reinvent it frequently to keep it fresh. Otherwise, it would be way too repetitive.

KK2 was a Castle theme more focused on action, just like Castle 2007 was more focused to fantasy.

They don't need to go so far when reinventing. Same goes for Nexo Knights (x1000).

Hopefully, they only do these drastic reinventions to get more people interested when they finally bring back real Castle sets again.

I'd like to see a book but I'm not interested in storylines...

I'd prefer to see:

- A photographic compilation of all the castle themes so far

- Some stuff about the design process of each theme

- Themes/sets ideas they never made

And the mandatory exclusive minifigure...

Yes, please. I'd love this book. I'd even be interested in storylines, but not so I can make them my own. It's just interesting to me to see what the original ideas are.

If LEGO took the effort of ansluzing the results of this poll they would shurely como out with the best castle line ever!

I completely agree. Take note, any of you LEGO employees known to peruse these boards!

Edited November 4, 2015 by x105Black

[thetang22]

I agree with you x105Black. I've always viewed all the factions through the years to be reinterpretations of the same existing factions that existed in the early days. I justified it by thinking of them as the same faction from different points in the history of Lego Castle, or by being sub-divisions of the same bigger faction (such as with the Dragons and Lions having several re-imaginings).

[Lord Tulkas]

The latest castle set i own is from KK1 (last week i order through bricklink two 2013 castle sets ), so for me the factions theme starts in Crusaders and ends in Leo. Although i always "created" my own version of the factions. Crusaders were a faction with red as they primary color (i didn't respect the torsos and mix them all). Black Falcons were another faction and Merlin was his leader (because he was blue, haha!). Dragons knights and masters were the same thing, but i only used for this faction the dragons masters torsos. The grey/black torsos with no heraldry were a mercenary factions, Fright Knights and Leo were two more, and Wolfpack and Forestmen were the others, they sometimes used to work together. I didn't have good guys and bad guys, just a lot of guys fighting! (I also have only one bull minifigure ho is used as a fallen Lord who commands the Forestmen.

I didn't have any "great" set (my biggest was the 6087 Witch's Magic Manor) but had a lot of minifigures, so my imagination do his job.

[x105Black]

I would certainly make my own factions, and mix and match minifigures. But I always tended to use the Dragon shields for one faction, the Lion shields for another, etc.

Funny, my brothers and I always called the Black Falcons the hawk knights.

I also have only one of the Bull knights.

Of the faction minifigures I had, I disliked the Dragon Masters the most because of the garish colors, mismatched legs, fabric capes and flags, and their helmets. I did like their sets a lot, though. I preferred the Black Knights for their generic prints, simple colors, and use of black. But most of all, I liked the Forestmen and Wolfpack because they were different from the knights and were more interesting.

[Captain Fortune]

I think of Dragon Masters as a continuation of Black Knights. Their fighting was more of a civil war, internal. But speaking of combined factions, I found it odd that there are 2 different Lion factions listed.

Ok, but this is nothing but your opinion. Is there any official document from Lego (I mean catalogs, boxes, etc.) speaking about such civil war? No, so please don't mix your opinions with the FACTS.

This theory seems even absurder when you realize that DG and BK have diffent commanders (Majisto and that "Black Monarch"), and absolutely different lookings, structures, etc. They have nothing to do one with the other.