2023 Majisto GWP

[brimbolet]

1 minute ago, Alexandrina said:

I think that's very unlikely unless it's in conjunction with a theme based on the same time period. GWPs have a much smaller budget for new parts than regular sets (hence why the amount of stickers on tiles and such) and they don't have much in the way of period-appropriate minifigure parts for these periods (the various CMF stuff being presumably no longer in rotation).

I'm not regularly at a Lego store, but when I am, I always find some historical torsos or legs from the older CMF series. So some parts must be still produced. I'll keep my fingers crossed for something special.

[Alexandrina]

15 minutes ago, brimbolet said:

I'm not regularly at a Lego store, but when I am, I always find some historical torsos or legs from the older CMF series. So some parts must be still produced. I'll keep my fingers crossed for something special.

I don't think this is common? I've never personally seen any CMF stuff more than a year old (though maybe I've just been unlucky). But for instance the gladiator helmet hasn't been produced in twelve years, and Lego have even done another gladiator CMF since - if they still had the mould in rotation, I'm sure they'd have used it by now. It's telling IMO that the Chariot GWP the other year just used a regular Castle helmet.

I'm hopeful too, I just think it's more likely to get these older periods in regular sets than GWPs, and I think they'd do a better job in regular sets too.

[Rjbricks]

30 minutes ago, Kit Figsto said:

I also feel like people are glossing over the fact that this set itself doesn't cost $250.  Like, this is the same thing as people getting annoyed about "having" to buy a $150 set just to get one minifigure, or whatever and are forgetting that you're paying for other things with it too.  Like, the way I see it, if you know there's a desirable GWP coming (which most people on this forum tend to be in the know about), I always just wait to buy stuff until the GWP is coming.  I've had my eye on the Eldorado Fortress for a bit, so I'm just choosing to buy it now and then will also get a couple of bonus items along the way.  I don't feel like I'm paying $250 for Majisto's Workshop, I feel like I'm paying $250 for the Eldorado Fortress plus one other set that's TBD, and getting two GWPs plus bonus rewards points.

I imagine one reason people are annoyed is because the reality of the set didn’t meet their anticipation. Especially considering the lack of castle sets over the last few years.

As to your example, I’m not sure I agree. I too would like the Eldorado set. But the threshold is £30 above that cost and there’s nothing else I want to spend. And £220 is a lot of money to spend on toys.

So I’ll pass on this unless it’s released with the medieval market square next year and falls within that price threshold.

 

Ive also realised why I’m cold on the new Dragon knight figure: blue arms. I’ve just had a look at my old ones and noticed I’ve replaced all the arms with black arms… 

[jtooker]

$250 is too high for this GWP on its own (looking back historically), but if you include double VIP Insider points and the other GWP set, it makes more sense.

E.g. $250 purchase gets you bonuses of:

• $30 GWP set
• $20 GWP set
• $25 in future savings ($12.50  more than normal)

For a total of $75.  (Not to imply everyone wouldn't exchange all that for $75 off their $250 order - or ~30% off)

Edited November 15, 2023 by jtooker

[Classic_Spaceman]

On 11/14/2023 at 2:33 AM, Sir Blew said:

Do you have any statistics on that? Or did you just make it up?

I am basing my assumption on discussions here and on other platforms, the fact that people who are neutral-to-mildly-positive about something rarely feel the need to broadcast their opinions, and that LEGO’s increase in gender balance over the past years does not seem to be impacting their sales in any easily-discernible way. Also, even among the people who have complained, more have stated that they would prefer male knights than have gotten aggro about the concept entirely. 
 

5 hours ago, Captain_SoyBeard said:

I mean It's ridiculous that after having bought the 10305 Lion Knights' Castle I had to also buy 10 or so heads on PAB just to replace all the ones with lipstick and mascara. It's just absurd how it is now

You would only have needed six, and did you really not have any male heads lying around? 
 

Back on-topic, I like the new Dragon Masters torso; I can see why people are having some issues with the silver collar (and I personally would have preferred blue to match the other cutouts on the torso), but I think that it will still look good with black helmets. 

Does anyone have recommendations for printed legs? The plain ones look OK in isolation, but I feel like the Minifig could look underdetailed next to the modernised Falcons and Lions. 
 

[zoth33]

3 hours ago, Rjbricks said:

I imagine one reason people are annoyed is because the reality of the set didn’t meet their anticipation. Especially considering the lack of castle sets over the last few years.

As to your example, I’m not sure I agree. I too would like the Eldorado set. But the threshold is £30 above that cost and there’s nothing else I want to spend. And £220 is a lot of money to spend on toys.

So I’ll pass on this unless it’s released with the medieval market square next year and falls within that price threshold.

 

Ive also realised why I’m cold on the new Dragon knight figure: blue arms. I’ve just had a look at my old ones and noticed I’ve replaced all the arms with black arms… 

The lack of castle sets the last two year?  The 3in1 castle set.  the Forestman GWP, The Lion knights castle, The viking longship, the new viking village and although not exactle castle the Rivendell set.  I'd say that's not to bad after nothing for like almost 10 years.  

[GeoBrick]

14 minutes ago, zoth33 said:

The lack of castle sets the last two year?  The 3in1 castle set.  the Forestman GWP, The Lion knights castle, The viking longship, the new viking village and although not exactle castle the Rivendell set.  I'd say that's not to bad after nothing for like almost 10 years.  

Definitely agree! And there's still (at least) two coming with the Majisto GWP and the Medieval Village/Market!
And if one is into that, there's still the Bricklink Designer Program and associated pop-up store. Plenty to keep the historical-minded AFOL busy for the next year or so.

[zoth33]

2 minutes ago, GeoBrick said:

Definitely agree! And there's still (at least) two coming with the Majisto GWP and the Medieval Village/Market!
And if one is into that, there's still the Bricklink Designer Program and associated pop-up store. Plenty to keep the historical-minded AFOL busy for the next year or so.

Yeah I forgot Lowenstein castle, and the castle in the forest.  

[Mandalorianknight]

11 hours ago, Kit Figsto said:

I also feel like people are glossing over the fact that this set itself doesn't cost $250.  Like, this is the same thing as people getting annoyed about "having" to buy a $150 set just to get one minifigure, or whatever and are forgetting that you're paying for other things with it too.  Like, the way I see it, if you know there's a desirable GWP coming (which most people on this forum tend to be in the know about), I always just wait to buy stuff until the GWP is coming.  I've had my eye on the Eldorado Fortress for a bit, so I'm just choosing to buy it now and then will also get a couple of bonus items along the way.  I don't feel like I'm paying $250 for Majisto's Workshop, I feel like I'm paying $250 for the Eldorado Fortress plus one other set that's TBD, and getting two GWPs plus bonus rewards points.

Sure, it's "free", but that doesn't mean it's unable to be judged. Especially when we have cheaper examples like the blacktron ship and Toa Tahu, or the Star Wars dioramas of the past few years (The GWPs, not the system ones).

The Majisto GWP has more parts, sure, but it doesn't feel up to that bar. Now part of it might be that I don't have much of an attachment to dragon knights or Majisto, but then again, I don't have much of one to Blacktron either, and looking at the two of them I'd honestly say the blacktron cruiser is a superior set, and was at a $60 cheaper threshold.

[GeoBrick]

3 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

... and was at a $60 cheaper threshold.

... only initially. The later times this particular GWP was on offer the threshold went up.

[Rjbricks]

10 hours ago, zoth33 said:

The lack of castle sets the last two year?  The 3in1 castle set.  the Forestman GWP, The Lion knights castle, The viking longship, the new viking village and although not exactle castle the Rivendell set.  I'd say that's not to bad after nothing for like almost 10 years.  

Few years, not two years, as you pointed out, we had nothing for nearly ten years. 
 

I’d also note that all of those sets you’ve listed are really good. And this one isn’t. 

[MAB]

4 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

The Majisto GWP has more parts, sure, but it doesn't feel up to that bar. Now part of it might be that I don't have much of an attachment to dragon knights or Majisto, but then again, I don't have much of one to Blacktron either, and looking at the two of them I'd honestly say the blacktron cruiser is a superior set, and was at a $60 cheaper threshold.

So don't place an order during this promo window, when you can get two boxed sets at the threshold needed for this set, possibly other promos depending on the theme, double insider points, and discounts on popular sets like Medieval Blacksmith and a retiring modular, at a busy time when many people will be buying for Christmas presents. 

[Sir Blew]

 

On 11/15/2023 at 5:21 AM, Peppermint_M said:

Hoakay

You know what staff don't like on the forum? A big, sprawling flame war in a thread for a a nice LEGO set.

Wow. Here I was thinking that this was a (relatively) cordial and (somewhat) interesting discussion about Lego's policies on character genders. Far from a "flame war". It probably deserves a thread of its own, but the conversation just developed here.

On 11/15/2023 at 5:21 AM, Peppermint_M said:

@Sir Blew It is not historical. It is not supposed to relate accurately to history. It is LEGO, not a museum scale model for education. You might be upset to hear Wizards didn't live in castles and certainly didn't look like Merlin from the Disney Sword in the Stone animation, if a woman being a Knight is harder to accept than that it's not a great look. LEGO is not an accurate representation of any kind of history. It is a toy for boys and girls to enjoy. 

You've missed my point entirely, and appear to have jumped to the wrong conclusion. I was not debating whether Lego should include female characters. I've never said that a woman shouldn't be a knight in a Lego set. I said it's not historically accurate, which is true, and that I want the option to make the knight male.

I, and many other Lego customers, personally prefer to represent characters such as warriors and knights as male, as they have historically been overwhelmingly male in both recorded history and the folklore which these sets are inspired by. That's my personal preference, and that's ok. Other people have different preferences, and that's ok too! The original non-gendered smiley faces of the original Castle figures allowed us to play the characters as whichever gender we wanted them to be, but is not possible nowadays with the gendered painted faces. Lego has taken that ability away.

So, I'm questioning why Lego doesn't simply include the option for us to swap male and female heads on the minifigures by including reversible or alternate male/female heads in the set. It appears to me to be such an easy way for Lego to please everyone, but for some reason they don't do it! By not doing so, Lego are enforcing genders, and often swaps genders on historical gender roles. That is to say, they are limiting the playability of Lego, which is contrary to the concept of Lego. It's also less inclusive, not more!

Yes we can source heads elsewhere, but that involves a lot more cost and effort than needs be when Lego could just include them in the sets.

For extra context, I feel I should also mention that I am a father of two young girls who I'm actively encouraging into Lego. The eldest is 6 and loves building many of these sets with me, the latest being the Viking ship. I am actively supportive of her playing with them in whichever way she wants to, with whichever characters and genders she wants to. If she wants every knight in her set or scene to be female then I'd support that 100%, because it's her choice, and that's what Lego is all about. As it happens, she's not as keen on Castle or Space themes as she is on Pirates and Vikings (anything with sailing ships apparently), but that's ok too. So, I have my own sets setup the way I like them, including male heads on characters that I prefer to be male, while the sets that we build together are the default 50/50.

On 11/15/2023 at 5:21 AM, Peppermint_M said:

All this hate for AFFOLs, because that is how it reads to me the staff who is a woman, needs to stop. It is not welcoming or pleasant to read in a community that has always wanted and tried to be friendly.

If "hate" is how it reads to you then I can only suggest that you're reading it wrong.

On 11/15/2023 at 5:21 AM, Peppermint_M said:

You both might find yourselves having a private chat with Staff which may not result in a return to the public forum.

If you're going to wave the ban hammer on a public forum at anyone who says anything that contradicts your own personal views then you will find it becomes a boring echo chamber where users are too fearful to share opinions. It's not a good look either.

On 11/15/2023 at 5:21 AM, Peppermint_M said:

It is frankly ridiculous. I am unlocking the thread, I am sure you are all brimming with vitriol after reading this post.  I am volunteering my time to help run a (normally) fun and creative community online, you are arguing about printing on a plastic cylinder. Recall though, who can edit member access.

 The irony is that you're also arguing about printing on a plastic cylinder! 

[TeriXeri]

16 hours ago, zoth33 said:

The lack of castle sets the last two year?  The 3in1 castle set.  the Forestman GWP, The Lion knights castle, The viking longship, the new viking village and although not exactle castle the Rivendell set.  I'd say that's not to bad after nothing for like almost 10 years.  

Also the winner from the Dungeons and Dragons IDEAS contest is still on the way ,  (original shown in picture, so final might be somewhat different, and currently not known when exactly)

Edited November 16, 2023 by TeriXeri

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Sir Blew said:

I, and many other Lego customers, personally prefer to represent characters such as warriors and knights as male, as they have historically been overwhelmingly male in both recorded history and the folklore which these sets are inspired by. That's my personal preference, and that's ok. Other people have different preferences, and that's ok too! The original non-gendered smiley faces of the original Castle figures allowed us to play the characters as whichever gender we wanted them to be, but is not possible nowadays with the gendered painted faces. Lego has taken that ability away.

So, I'm questioning why Lego doesn't simply include the option for us to swap male and female heads on the minifigures by including reversible or alternate male/female heads in the set. It appears to me to be such an easy way for Lego to please everyone, but for some reason they don't do it! By not doing so, Lego are enforcing genders, and often swaps genders on historical gender roles. That is to say, they are limiting the playability of Lego, which is contrary to the concept of Lego. It's also less inclusive, not more!

 

It won't please everyone. There will be arguments about whether it should have the male or female head shown on the box, and in the instructions, and then whether it should be catalogued at Bricklink as a male or female character. There have been similar arguments in the past where two heads are supplied in sets such as this one: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=5004931-1 and this one https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=850791-1. And then this set https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=21337-1 where all the figures were catalogued as female as this is how they first appear in the instructions. Would you be pleased if all the figures in the Lion Knights Castle if all the figures are shown first as female even if you can change them to male?

[jodawill]

Double printed heads would be a lot more annoying because it severely limits how they can be used. I may be in the minority, but I don't like them. I only use smiley face prints - not the classic smiley, but smiling faces in general.

There's a great red headed face in production right now that would be perfect for the forestmen, but it has an almost identical face on the opposite side, so it can't be used with the forestmen hat. I'm tempted to brasso it off, but I'm too much of a purist to bring myself to doing that.

[Peppermint_M]

4 hours ago, Sir Blew said:

If "hate" is how it reads to you then I can only suggest that you're reading it wrong.

I think you were reading comments directed to someone else, the one who decided crass language was appropriate. I had asked for this discussion to be concluded, as it was well off the rails on the actual set. Coming onto the forum for 12 reports related to a thread that had gotten out of hand enough to require locking does require a harder response. 

As such, time to move on. 

If I was not clear enough earlier: The Printing of the minifig face is now fully discussed and has gone well beyond the actual set discussion. Please refrain from bringing it up and raking it over again. If people must raise it, those posts will be hidden and removed from the thread entirely. 

Suggestions to help those who will need to change the head are welcome within reason.

[Classic_Spaceman]

5 hours ago, Sir Blew said:

So, I'm questioning why Lego doesn't simply include the option for us to swap male and female heads on the minifigures by including reversible or alternate male/female heads in the set. 

I would actually like to get alternate heads in sets, not so that I can switch them, but because it would make building armies with unique faces easier. Reversible male/female heads, however, would be horrendous! We would lose the benefits of both single-side heads (the ability to use with headgear that does not cover the back of the head) and double-side ones (the ability to show more than one expression)! The only context in which I would be OK with this kind of head is of it were for a shapeshifter or a person in a mask. 
 

2 hours ago, jodawill said:

Double printed heads would be a lot more annoying because it severely limits how they can be used. I may be in the minority, but I don't like them. 

I like them, but it can be frustrating to source heads to use with headgear that does not cover the back of the head. 

2 hours ago, jodawill said:

There's a great red headed face in production right now that would be perfect for the forestmen, but it has an almost identical face on the opposite side, so it can't be used with the forestmen hat. 

I am honestly not sure what the thought-process behind that head was, since the expressions are almost indistinguishable! 
 

[zoth33]

14 hours ago, Rjbricks said:

Few years, not two years, as you pointed out, we had nothing for nearly ten years. 
 

I’d also note that all of those sets you’ve listed are really good. And this one isn’t. 

Yes I'm just saying I really like that castle has returned and to your second point that is your opinion.  As far as the Majisto set is concerned yes it isn't the greatest thing ever and I understand the criticisms but my point was that we have had plenty of castle recently and this GWP is the worst so far as sets go isn't that bad of a thing to me.  Not every set is going to be great.  I like Ninjago dragons and not all of them look great some I could care less about it's all up to your personal preference.  I don't think it's something to get upset about.  We still have the Market Village and the D&D set coming so I'm looking forward to those sets also.  

 

9 hours ago, TeriXeri said:

Also the winner from the Dungeons and Dragons IDEAS contest is still on the way ,  (original shown in picture, so final might be somewhat different, and currently not known when exactly)

I 

Yeah this should be and interesting set to see what the final product will be.  Can't wait to see this and the village sets.  It's been so nice having all these castle sets after years of nothing.  This weekend I will be getting the viking village set and some christmas presents which will be great with the double vip points and all the gwp's.  

[Yoggington]

8 hours ago, jodawill said:

There's a great red headed face in production right now that would be perfect for the forestmen, but it has an almost identical face on the opposite side, so it can't be used with the forestmen hat. I'm tempted to brasso it off, but I'm too much of a purist to bring myself to doing that.

Have you considered using the hat with hair too?

or is that against purist rules

Edited November 17, 2023 by Yoggington

[Sir Blew]

Now that's more like it!

https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-164355/bricks_fan_uy/wizards-magical-workshop/

[RichardGoring]

9 minutes ago, Sir Blew said:

Now that's more like it!

https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-164355/bricks_fan_uy/wizards-magical-workshop/

Agreed. Looks great!

[Shroffy123]

36 minutes ago, Sir Blew said:

Now that's more like it!

https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-164355/bricks_fan_uy/wizards-magical-workshop/

That's what I was hoping we'd get 

[Retrocity]

The interior details of that MOC are what I was hoping we would get a little of in the remake.  I wouldn't have expected it all, but even a table and some vials to give Majisto some equipment.  It would have been easy to throw in a few current parts and not greatly add to the piece count or the perceived value of the set.  I think that would have slightly made up for the lack of a shield and proper helmet.  I get that they kept the build close to the original with slight updates, but additional detail would have been nice.

Regardless, it's all customizable, I'll probably add some details over time.  When I got sets as a kid in the 90s, I always wanted to add additional things to the builds.  The big difference was that it wasn't easy to get extra parts back then.  I actually wrote a letter to LEGO with a list of parts I wanted one time as part of a school project.  The bulk of the letter was me suggesting new themes and asking other questions lol.  I couldn't imagine if there was access to PAB, Bricklink, eBay, ect... then.  Anyway, a while back I had seen green and gold colored dragon plumes and had been putting off ordering some.  I added some blue ones as well and hopefully they will come about the same time as the set.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Retrocity

[R0Sch]

I just bought the Nexo Knights Book second hand just to get a much better looking Merlin now. One might even say he is the twin brother of Merlok.