Castle Sets 2010

[Hound Knight]

A gatehouse would certainly be nice for example.

As well as an actual baseplate(s).

[Svelte]

I'm a little surprised people are upset with the King's Castle Siege as far as how "classic" it looks. It definitely doesn't have the same feel as sets from the eighties, but nothing we get these days will. I thought the King's Castle Siege was by far the closest thing we've had to classic sets such as King's Castle, especially compared to the previous one-sided castles on raised baseplates.

I agree completely. 7094 King's Castle Siege is a great set, with the enclosed back everyone always wants, 900+ mainly useful parts, and no raised baseplate Yes, the interior was lacking but certainly no worse than many other sets.

If LEGO produced something similar by reducing the scale slightly and adding an interior, I'd be happy.

I'm not so keen on animal factions again after KK1 and KK2, but it will all depend on fig design. And I'd prefer it if the 'evil' faction wasn't all furrowed brows, narrow squinty eyes, unkempt beards and, post Agents and Pirates, gold glinting teeth

[Nicker]

I would imagine that people simply are hoping for a castle that steps things up a level. A gatehouse would certainly be nice for example.

That's what I'm hoping for. As far as I'm concerned I can't see any reason why they couldn't have put a proper gatehouse on it. I found the lack of a gatehouse was the most disappointing flaw in the Kings Castle Siege design as it has been with the few large castles that have come before it. It is very simple common sense that if they didn't want to put the gatehouse on the castle for some reason then they should have left out the portcullis completely and used a pair of double doors instead like the ones at the back of the castle. Set 6081 Kings Mountain Fortress is a perfect example of this logical design concept. You could have the doors open to the inside or the outside whatever functions best with the design. I really think Lego designers need to keep in mind that their designs need to make sense and be practical as well as looking good all at the same time. I have to say that I wouldn't want my children thinking that the portcullis stuck out over the battlements when it was raised on medieval castles. One recent set, the Medieval Market Village was well thought out and designed! Lets hope the 2010 sets are at least a step in the right direction.

I'm new to some of this lingo here. I keep reading people talk about impulses and impulse sets. Can someone please enlighten me and give me a few examples of impulse sets?

Edited November 26, 2009 by Nicker

[Sir Dillon]

I'm new to some of this lingo here. I keep reading people talk about impulses and impulse sets. Can someone please enlighten me and give me a few examples of impulse sets?

The impulse sets are the smallest of the line, cheap enough that they could be easily purchased on an "impulse". They usually include one figure and some accessories. The previous Castle impulse sets were The Knight, The Good Wizard, and Troll Warrior.

[Nicker]

The impulse sets are the smallest of the line, cheap enough that they could be easily purchased on an "impulse". They usually include one figure and some accessories. The previous Castle impulse sets were The Knight, The Good Wizard, and Troll Warrior.

Thanks for the explanation, that makes sense.

[fenrir]

That's what I'm hoping for. As far as I'm concerned I can't see any reason why they couldn't have put a proper gatehouse on it. I found the lack of a gatehouse was the most disappointing flaw in the Kings Castle Siege design as it has been with the few large castles that have come before it. It is very simple common sense that if they didn't want to put the gatehouse on the castle for some reason then they should have left out the portcullis completely and used a pair of double doors instead like the ones at the back of the castle. Set 6081 Kings Mountain Fortress is a perfect example of this logical design concept. You could have the doors open to the inside or the outside whatever functions best with the design. I really think Lego designers need to keep in mind that their designs need to make sense and be practical as well as looking good all at the same time. I have to say that I wouldn't want my children thinking that the portcullis stuck out over the battlements when it was raised on medieval castles. One recent set, the Medieval Market Village was well thought out and designed! Lets hope the 2010 sets are at least a step in the right direction.

I'm new to some of this lingo here. I keep reading people talk about impulses and impulse sets. Can someone please enlighten me and give me a few examples of impulse sets?

I agree with you.

I think if the latest castle would have had a gatehouse (instead of a portcullis hanging somewhere in the air) and perhaps the back of the castle a bit more less ´open designed´ the set would be perfect. I pay much more for a great design.

Í hope the new castle theme will contain realistic castles.

[RocketClone]

I agree with you.

I think if the latest castle would have had a gatehouse (instead of a portcullis hanging somewhere in the air) and perhaps the back of the castle a bit more less ´open designed´ the set would be perfect. I pay much more for a great design.

Í hope the new castle theme will contain realistic castles.

As far as im concerned TLGs target group are kids, so IMO i think we will see a nicely built castle from probaly the factory line. (like the space skulls, and the space police like faction)

[The Green Brick Giant]

Catoring to AFOLs doesn't necessarily mean alienating younger consumers. The two groups are not mutually exclusive. That being said, the return to two human factions strikes me as something that will certainly appeal to a number of AFOLs who weren't entirely happy with the current theme.

In all seriousness, a throwback to older themes doesn't perclude all fantasy elements (the Wizard being an obvious example). That being said, the current line is dominated by fantasy figures. Some AFOLs do miss the days when we had multiple human factions. It has been a topic of much discussion here and elsewhere. A human vs. human faction has been something a number of AFOLs have been requesting and after three years of Crownies and monsters it sounds like a much needed change is on the doorstep.

I don't mind human on human, I think the current line should continue with other human fractions.

I find it interesting that LEGO doesn't like human on human in it's themes, Agents, Space Police, Power Miners, yet will bring it back in Castle.

[Darth Hawken]

I would like to see elves in theme and keep going with orcs maybe this will turn out like lord of the rings which would be amazing

[Tereglith]

I'm really looking forward to this! It should certainly help soften the blows of losing both Bionicle and IJ to have a new, fresh castle line. I already want the wizard impulse

Of course, I'm probably going to have to pull a Batbrick with the storyline, making it so that the Snake faction is the opressed former government that was just and good, but which fell to the corrupt Lions due to the efforts of their informer, the Lion king who was posing as the Snake king's trusted adviser.

[legomilk]

Sorry friends I remember nothing about a new castle series in 2010

[lightningtiger]

I don't mind human on human, I think the current line should continue with other human fractions.

I find it interesting that LEGO doesn't like human on human in it's themes, Agents, Space Police, Power Miners, yet will bring it back in Castle.

Pardon, Agents is mostly human on human !

What about Batman, Spiderman, Indi, Pirates and original Star Wars to name a few ?

Impulse sets are good way to introduce or even reintroduce a theme, look at Pirates or SP3, their impulse packs were released months before actual sets were.

[RocketClone]

Pardon, Agents is mostly human on human !

What about Batman, Spiderman, Indi, Pirates and original Star Wars to name a few ?

Impulse sets are good way to introduce or even reintroduce a theme, look at Pirates or SP3, their impulse packs were released months before actual sets were.

Yeah but 4 out of those 5 are lisenced but yes i see what your saying.

[The Green Brick Giant]

Yeah but 4 out of those 5 are lisenced but yes i see what your saying.

Bingo.

Pirates are also bad, as a kid we are taught they aren't really human. :lol: Agents fight mutants and weird stuff. lol

However with Castle it's one human knight verse another, it's different. Too me the orcs almost look human, about as human as the Agents things do.

[blueandwhite]

Bingo.

Pirates are also bad, as a kid we are taught they aren't really human. :lol: Agents fight mutants and weird stuff. lol

However with Castle it's one human knight verse another, it's different. Too me the orcs almost look human, about as human as the Agents things do.

The thing is, the LEGO pirates have always been portrayed as being the protagonists of the Pirates line. This idea of having monsters and dinosaurs as villians is a fairly recent trend in LEGO's history. We were fine for years with multiple human factions. Perhaps a larger point was that the classic factions didn't seem nearly as antagonistic. We simply had a variety of knights and outlaws occupying a Kingdom. There was no clear-cut hero or villian and the sets were designed in a way that you could easily reverse those rolls if you so chose. Even themes like Adventures with a clearly defined hero were designed in a way that you could easily sympathize with both the heroes and the villians. The characters were treated in a fairly neutral manner.

With more recent lines there is an emphasis on overtly evil villians with monster henchmem, skeletons and robots. It almost seems that by dehumanizing certain figures that it somehow condones a violent attitude towards them. I've held this view since I was a child. I remember how in Cartoons like GI Joe and TMNT the heroes always had hordes of robots to kill which apparently justified the use of lethal force. In GI Joe the Joes couldn't shoot the broad side of a barn when going up against a human foe, but when it was a robot or a vehicle they suddenly became snipers with handguns. The same was true of the Ninja Turtles. I seem to recall that only after cutting up several of the robot villians (footsoldiers I think?) one of the turtles comments that they are robots so destroying them is okay. Strange that there was an apparent intent to kill before they made this discovery. I find that the inclusiion of inhuman creatures is simply an excuse to emphasize the more violent tone of certain themes without comming across as being morally inappropriate.

I'm all for two human factions as I was never fond of the overt good vs. evil themes that LEGO has been pushing.

[Nicker]

I'm all for two human factions as I was never fond of the overt good vs. evil themes that LEGO has been pushing.

I agree. I never did like good vs evil that much especially if it was blatant. I welcome the idea of human factions returning especially because that's what medieval times were about. There were always waring clans and kingdoms made up of all human factions.

Here is page I scanned out of the 1992 Lego catalogue that shows all the different human factions at the time and gives a brief description but doesn't make any one group sound more evil than the others. It really leaves it up to your imagination to draw conclusions.

[The Green Brick Giant]

I can promise one thing, there won't be a group called Crusaders anytime soon.

My point earlier is why do they need to star ta whole new Castle line, they could expand the current one and have Evles, and Wolfmen (now with wolf heads) and forestmen in the current theme.

However any Castle is better than no Castle as long as the shields aren't stickers.

[Nicker]

I can promise one thing, there won't be a group called Crusaders anytime soon.

Ya, I can't see that happening again either. In fact I am a bit surprised that Lego named a faction Crusaders back in the early 90s. But that's when there was more historic influence on the Lego castle theme. It's seems that was traded in for more fantasy influence.

Edited November 28, 2009 by Nicker

[Rick]

I agree. I never did like good vs evil that much especially if it was blatant. I welcome the idea of human factions returning especially because that's what medieval times were about. There were always waring clans and kingdoms made up of all human factions.

Here is page I scanned out of the 1992 Lego catalogue that shows all the different human factions at the time and gives a brief description but doesn't make any one group sound more evil than the others. It really leaves it up to your imagination to draw conclusions.

This is a good example of one of the great things about the classic castle theme. I never knew TLG was so 'neutral' back then. I don't remember ever seeing this info in a Dutch catalog.

[Wout]

This is a good example of one of the great things about the classic castle theme. I never knew TLG was so 'neutral' back then. I don't remember ever seeing this info in a Dutch catalog.

I thought there were little short descriptions in the dutch catalogue, which were a bit like this.

[Batbrick]

I'll agree with those saying that a more "neutral" theme would be great, I'd love for the two human factions to both have different colour schemes without one resorting to black and red.

Batbrick Away!

[lightningtiger]

If this the way Lego wants to go, then so be it. But note, those in favor of human vs. human, how old are you ? I know it's a personal question, but this product is mean't to be aimed at eight to twelve year olds right.

Just look at Clone Wars (human vs. machine) and Mars Mission (human vs. alien), then non-Lego lines like Transformers (non-human vs. non-human), kids at school have it drummed in to them that human fighting human is bad !

Things like Batman, police, cowboy and pirates themes are simply good guy vs. bad guy, the hero battling the outlaw in the name of justice.

Has anyone asked the kids what they want ?

Learn - Live - Life - Lego !

[Etzel]

Has anyone asked the kids what they want ?

Of course TLG has asked the kids. They do a h*ll of lot of research and testing amongst kids before deciding a new theme and sets.

And I don't like the idea of humans fighting non-humans should be seen as more "acceptable" than humans. vs. humans. Xenophobia, that's what it's called.

[RocketClone]

You know this sort of thing also goes to the Space Police line as well.

[Nicker]

If this the way Lego wants to go, then so be it. But note, those in favor of human vs. human, how old are you ? I know it's a personal question, but this product is mean't to be aimed at eight to twelve year olds right.

Just look at Clone Wars (human vs. machine) and Mars Mission (human vs. alien), then non-Lego lines like Transformers (non-human vs. non-human), kids at school have it drummed in to them that human fighting human is bad !

Things like Batman, police, cowboy and pirates themes are simply good guy vs. bad guy, the hero battling the outlaw in the name of justice.

Has anyone asked the kids what they want ?

Learn - Live - Life - Lego !

I am 29 years old now but I was a kid in the age range you describe during the 80s. I understood medieval basics even at age 5. I knew what a siege tower was and what a portcullis and drawbridge were. I loved castle Lego as a kid with factions of human vs human and I understood that if I wanted to have a evil faction I would make one of them evil as I saw fit. A time existed in Lego history when Lego didn't have to define how the good guys or bad guys were. I have nothing against fantasy themes in general as I am a huge Lord of the Rings fan but I think fantasy themes are all to common these days especially with kids toys. I know kids are different now and it takes more to get and keep their interest compared to children of the 80s but I would bet that Lego castle sold better in the 80s and early 90s compared to sales now, just a guess. When the Dragon Masters faction came out in 1993 that was the beginning of the end for the glory years of Castle Lego in my opinion.