I found myself making an observation over Christmas. My wife and I bought our 6 year old boy the Ninjago Epic Dragon Battle set for Christmas, and it's definitely his favorite gift. He's really into the cartoon, and he has some of the other Ninjago sets as well. When he opened it up, he was most excited about the figures that came in the box; he didn't have a Lloyd, Garmadon, or Sensei Wu yet. After all the presents were unwrapped he went to the playroom to start building his new set. He was in there for most of the morning; when I checked on him hours later he hadn't even built through the first bag yet. He was having fun playing with the minifigures. As of right now, he just has the dragon built, the rest of the bags in the set haven't even been opened yet. Every time he goes to the playroom to play with his Lego, he just plays with the figures. Has anyone else experienced this with their kids? Most of the cost of the set is the Lego pieces, yet they aren't getting played with nearly as much as the minifigs. It's basically turned into an expensive action figure set. I know he can do the build, he's only 6 but he's built larger models by himself before.

In my childhood, I loved the building aspect the most, the minifigures were simply a part of the build, someone to man the spaceship I just built. I got a sense of accomplishment building a large model, and showing my parents what I had done. I also enjoyed taking the model apart and building other things. I think this might have to do with the way Lego markets their toy now. In my lego heyday (the 80's), the boxes emphasized the build, they included pictures of alternate models, etc. The TV commercials emphasized the building aspect of Lego. Today, it seems very character driven. The Ninjago cartoon doesn't involve any sort of bricks or building, it's all about the minifigure characters. The minifigs are emphasized on the box as a big feature of a set, and there are no alternate model ideas to be found. It could also just be that he and I have different play styles, and he prefers playing with figures where I enjoyed the building aspect more.

Just some observations I found interesting, any other parents notice this while watching their kids play with Lego?

No, I don't think so. If anything, the LEGO Group's emphasis on minifigures is a response to the way kids play. Kids like unique minifigures, therefore, the LEGO Group puts a lot of time into designing creative minifigures for sets, especially the largest and most expensive sets. This is also part of the reason many sets are designed with lots of separate models divided into different bags — even before you're finished building the entire set, you'll have the minifigures and some parts of the set to play with.

The Ninjago cartoon is character-driven and includes very little building because to a casual, non-FOL viewer, it makes it feel more like a story and less like a cheesy toy commercial (therefore, non-FOL parents are less likely to discourage their kids from watching it than if everything in it were an exact replica of the toys). And the commercials for the toys still emphasize the construction of the models and the play features of the finished models over the minifigure characters — at most, they might mention one or two of the characters by name, but the camera is generally focused on the models.

You might be pleased to know, though, that this year's 70725 Nindroid MechDragon has no more than one minifigure for each section of the build. Therefore, following the instructions, you won't have all the minifigures until you have completed at least the first four sections of the model in other words, pretty much everything but the wings). Perhaps the LEGO Group realized that building ALL of the figures at once at the very beginning was too distracting for younger builders. Therefore, you get them gradually as the model comes together. You will always have at least one minifigure from the very beginning, so for instance you will be able to play with Sensei Garmadon in the buggy as soon as Bag 1 is complete, but it's not so incredibly distracting.

Personally, I am a bit surprised that your son even has so much fun with the minifigures without the sets to support them. I'm a serious Ninjago minifigure collector, but without any kind of model to put the figures in, I don't have much to do with them except line them up on a baseplate for ease of comparison. They don't have enough articulation for a whole lot of "action play".

Perhaps there's another issue that you're not considering. The biggest Ninjago sets are designed with a minimum recommended age range of eight. Even if your son loves LEGO and is proficient at building, perhaps he feels intimidated or frustrated by the amount of building it takes to complete a set of that size. I have known a lot of kids (including not just kids I know today but also my peers from childhood) who have had this problem. My younger brother is 16 now (yikes!), but I can still notice a certain amount of frustration when he builds large models himself — he certainly doesn't have the patience to go back and check if he missed a part, and by a certain point I feel like he only keeps building in order to get it over with.

I know your child is certainly old enough to build the sets on his own if he chooses to, but have you considered offering to build the sets with him? This might help keep him engaged and add a dynamic social component to the building experience as you alternate steps (occasionally trade or give up steps if you end up with a step that he wants to do himself). Part of the reason I have always been able to remain engaged when building a large set is that I have always had a twin brother to share the experience with. Building a large set on my own, without anyone to share it with, is not nearly as exciting or memorable.

This way you also get a better idea of your son's building habits. If he still gets bored and wants to take frequent breaks, even with another person to build with, then it may very well be the size of the model that is frustrating him. But you will be there to encourage him to keep going and perhaps come up with ways to make the experience more fun for him. For instance, the two of you can pretend that the minifigures are helping to build the model, thus integrating the minifigure play with the building experience!

Edited January 3, 201411 yr by Aanchir

Minifigures aren't a new thing. They supplement the building process by providing characters with which children can identify and play. I don't myself recall doing that, preferring to build instead, but I'm sure I must have played with the minifigures as characters at some point.

There's nothing wrong with a child treating minifigures like small action figures - it allows creativity. Your son's obviously having lots of fun with his minifigures and, when he builds the rest of the set, he'll have more fun.

LEGO has had unique, named characters for quite a while now. It's over two decades! Perhaps there are more now than ever before, but dating back to the original Pirates line and Castle at the same time, there were unique figures.

The late 90s had plenty too - Rock Raiders was all specific characters, and Ninja had its share as well. Even if not everybody knew their names, the fact that there was only one white ninja in one set was cool. As a child I put a lot of emphasis on the minifigures in my play. Sure, the model is there for them to interact with, but it was all about the minifigures first and them interacting with the set second. I made up my own names for characters when LEGO had none, but still.

I know your child is certainly old enough to build the sets on his own if he chooses to, but have you considered offering to build the sets with him? This might help keep him engaged and add a dynamic social component to the building experience as you alternate steps (occasionally trade or give up steps if you end up with a step that he wants to do himself). Part of the reason I have always been able to remain engaged when building a large set is that I have always had a twin brother to share the experience with. Building a large set on my own, without anyone to share it with, is not nearly as exciting or memorable.

I do build with him frequently, I think it might be more of an attention span thing than anything else. We spent the weeks before Christmas building the Winter Village models together (the Cottage and the Toy Shop). He would build for about a half hour, with me helping him find the pieces for each step, but after that he went straight to the minifigs. I don't mind this at all, every kid plays differently and I want him to have a fun an enjoyable experience. He has the skill to be able to build sets over his age range, but perhaps not the attention span.

For instance, the two of you can pretend that the minifigures are helping to build the model, thus integrating the minifigure play with the building experience!

He started doing this the other day when he was building the dragon by himself, he had Lloyd and Wu helping with the build, while Garmadon was hiding the pieces from them. Thought it was pretty funny

LEGO has had unique, named characters for quite a while now. It's over two decades! Perhaps there are more now than ever before, but dating back to the original Pirates line and Castle at the same time, there were unique figures.

My Lego dark age started in 1990, and I've only been an AFOL for a year or so. The named minifigure thing is brand new to me

Minifigures aren't a new thing. They supplement the building process by providing characters with which children can identify and play. I don't myself recall doing that, preferring to build instead, but I'm sure I must have played with the minifigures as characters at some point.

There's nothing wrong with a child treating minifigures like small action figures - it allows creativity. Your son's obviously having lots of fun with his minifigures and, when he builds the rest of the set, he'll have more fun.

I was always a lot more interested in the characters in Legos than the building. And this started before the days of minifigs. My first set was Farm -- and had brick built characters. The next two -- Kitchen and Bathroom -- had mostly brick built characters and the only minifigs were the kids. (Though they were my favorite characters)

When I was kid I went to great lengths to make my minifigures unique and name them and come up with personalities and all that.

I also enjoyed building models, but anything I built was just to supplement the story I was telling about the characters I had already invented. And this was back before any licensed stuff (although I remember getting a huge thrill when I found Lego was beginning to give names to at least certain characters, like Captain Redbeard).

Edited January 3, 201411 yr by Hobbestimus

I've seen both sides with my kids and their Christmas LEGO.

My 5-year-old son asked my parents for the Golden Dragon. So far, I don't think he's touched the dragon at all since he and I (mostly I) built it. I think he really just wanted the Golden Ninja. He also got the Dragon Mountain and Gatehouse Raid. I saw that the Gatehouse is in a few pieces so he must be at least "attacking" it. His Castle minifigs and Dragon are all in pieces. That's how he signifies they are dead when he's playing. *Thank you very much, Traveler's Tales*

My 3-year-old daughter got the Heartlake pool and the Dolphin Cruiser and she has been spending a lot of time driving around the boat, as well as playing with the minidolls in the pool and boat.

I collected castle LEGO when I was a kid and the minifigs and castles were kind of inseparable. I wouldn't play with one without the other. :)

As a young child, I found absolute delight in playing with the minifigures, and still do as a teen! Nevertheless, I have always considered both the build AND minifig portions of a set as equally vital aspects of the building (and playing) experience, the minifigures add depth and more life to the build while the build itself offers an exciting environment for the minifigures to populate.

While Lego is clearly aware of the appeal of minifigures (and how many people are willing to buy sets solely for them), they rarely (IMO) truly exploit the fact. What I absolutely love is that with most themes, Lego offer interesting builds (most of the time) along with detailed and well designed minifigures to compliment them, which not only enhances the playing experience, but is a testament to Lego's increasing quality over the years.

However, licensed themes often prove to be an exception to this, this year's Star Wars winter-wave spring to mind. The sets are well designed for the most part, but it's evident the emphasis is on the minifigures themselves - for example the AT-AP commercial ends with pictures of the boxed sets AND the minifigures, which (to my knowledge), hasn't been done before.

The Superheroes line also seems to suffer from this flaw - 2014's Marvel sets are clearly emphasising on minifigures instead of builds, the Hulk Lab Smash especially harkens back to the days of much simpler builds, while still offering superbly designed minifigures.

But time and again licensed themes also offer minifigures and builds which compliment each other well - the Lone Ranger theme is a shining example of this.

I think generally, it's a matter of patience. Kids want to play with what they just bought as soon as they open it, and while the building experience most definitely is fun, it can also be tedious (as most have said already) for the younger age groups, they want something to play with as soon as possible - enter the set's minifigures (though as Aanchir has stated, Lego is beginning to spread out the minifigures across multiple bags for the larger sets to also focus attention on the building aspect).

Minifigures are an extremely important aspect of all System sets, and while Lego certainly puts a lot of effort and detail into their minifigures, they certainly won't tip the scales to favour them over the build, they did start off as a building block company after all, and will never forget these roots, the build makes the set as much as the minifigures do - it's all a matter of being patient with the builds for the younger fans.

Edited January 3, 201411 yr by Kaijumeister

I think generally, it's a matter of patience. Kids want to play with what they just bought as soon as they open it, and while the building experience most definitely is fun, it can also be tedious (as most have said already) for the younger age groups, they want something to play with as soon as possible - enter the set's minifigures (though as Aanchir has stated, Lego is beginning to spread out the minifigures across multiple bags for the larger sets to also focus attention on the building aspect).

I thought Lego was spreading out the minifigures to make it harder for thieves to slit the boxes and steal just the minifigures?

I wonder if my own play style would have changed if I had the unique minifigs that Lego offers today. I collected mostly castle and space when I was a kid. With space, you got 4 colors of the exact same spaceman. With the 80's castle, you got a bunch of generic soldiers, and occassionally a peasant or princess type figure. So like one of the posters above, I built different environments for my guys to live in, the figs and the bricks were always together. I think with today's minifigs it's just as appealing to play with them separately as well as with the set. It's true that they don't have much articulation, but a kid doesn't care much about that. The ninjago figures are all loaded with accessories and weapons, which is way more important

The Friends sets are definitely designed to be played with as they are built. TLG explained this when they released the sets, saying that their observations showed girls more often started playing with the figures before the set was completely built. So they arrange the bags and instructions to promote this. It might be that this is not strictly a "girl" thing. It might be that the presence of minifigs overshadow the building aspects regardless of gender.

I think presently minifigures play a bigger role in Lego sets than they use to. Sure Lego has had minifigures in sets for a long time now, but have they always been so prominent? Lego just recently started introducing battle packs and blister packs with nothing but minifigures and a few weapons or accessories. They never had these before. Older sets never even displayed the figures prominently on the front of the packaging like they do now either. Heck, I remember as a kid trying to count the minifigures littered through a set because you only saw them interacting in the build. There was no nice display in the bottom or right part of the packaging. And like naf points out, older sets use to have 2-3 builds where as nowadays all sets except Creator only have a single build (and Creator has no minifigures...). I would say the emphasis use to be 25% on the figures and 75% on the build where as now it seems more 50/50.

Personally I don't see this as an issue as long as the build is still engaging and good. I mean what 8 year old wants to build a castle and then set it on display because they can't really play with it? A castle by itself is fun to build and a nice display piece but has little play value without the minifigures. The figres and build really compliment each other. With just bricks all kids can do is build a set, take it apart and build something else. While this may keep them thinking and be engaging the minifigures are what are needed to make up stories and interact with their creations.

I think minifigures are more important than they used to be due to the increase in promenence of the “collectible” concept.

When I was a kid playing with Castle sets, I would make up my characters from the figures I had, sinceeither the figures did not have names or I did not bother to remember them. For the most part, named or important minifigures were the ones with additional armor or other noteworthy markings. These minifigures played a huge role in my Lego play, because they allowed me to better interact with sets or designs that I had created in scale. I could pretend to walk around that town or castle I made as a minifigure. And, of course, my minifigures always had action and adventure when interacting in those worlds.

I feel that especially with the development of licensed sets that Lego has realized they can maximize sales by offering special or unique minifigures as a way to promote what may be otherwise perceived as bland sets. I could probably point to many sets licensed and non-licensed that I would feel have a heavier push with minifigures as maybe Lego needed to add more to those sets to make them more marketable.

Essentially, minifigures have become anothermethod by which TLG can market sets to a wider audience. Surely, with the SW license, many people (including myself) buy sets just for specific minifigures. To me this is a win-win, since it still promotes Lego sales.

Minifigures do play an important role since their debut. All buildings scale are considered to be played with minifigures and TLG only leave few different scales such as Creator or Technic. When you say "minifigures are just part of my building", that is acutally the beginning of the whole story.

CMF is one of the example that TLC obivously give consumers sole minifigures (and we decide whether we would put them in other building sets). Generic minifigures can't afford the needs from fans who want to create a scenario of more sophisticated characters, so it shows the real value of minifigures.

TLG is trying to make own original characters more unique and visible from consumers, and write a specific story for them. When TLG began to get licensed themes (because they wanted to compete with other companies at first), they realized that how can they make own original products more appealing to children. Children now buy sets not only because the buildings, but there are Olivia, Laval and Benny, those who they love. You may imagine that if Ninjago is just a rehashed version of the old Castle Ninja, the profits wouldnn't be that big.

Playing with minifigures solely could be alittle similar with girls playing with Barbie (there are Barbie houses and playsets but isn't the most important part in Mattel's line), though minifigures/dolls can't change "clothes" but only swap bodies. Well, there are also Bionicle action figures that allow us to play solely in the "official" way.

There are different kids. Inventing themes with stories doesn't mean that generic themes would disappear, though it has actually been a topic that whether licensed themes are replacing old original themes.

Like others said, if there is no character, buildings would also be boring and lifeless. IMO, what TLG can do is highlighting the connections between the buildings and the characters. If Ninjago ninjas are not driving any vehicle, they're no "ninja". So no matter if kids love buidlings or characters more, they won't just get one of them.

My 5-year-old son asked my parents for the Golden Dragon. So far, I don't think he's touched the dragon at all since he and I (mostly I) built it. I think he really just wanted the Golden Ninja. He also got the Dragon Mountain and Gatehouse Raid. I saw that the Gatehouse is in a few pieces so he must be at least "attacking" it. His Castle minifigs and Dragon are all in pieces. That's how he signifies they are dead when he's playing. *Thank you very much, Traveler's Tales*

My 3-year-old daughter got the Heartlake pool and the Dolphin Cruiser and she has been spending a lot of time driving around the boat, as well as playing with the minidolls in the pool and boat...

Oops, beware of small parts.

It's one's will if they just buy for minifigure or play sets in a way that TLC didn't recommend, however, in your case maybe I'd go Bricklink and get the character.

Edited January 4, 201411 yr by Dorayaki

As a kid in the 70's/80's, I never thought of the minifig as an important part of Lego. Just A part. For me it was the building of cars, spaceships, and houses that was the most important thing about 'playing' with Lego. The original sets would be build once, maybe twice. I've always wanted to build my own creations rather than the original sets. Even when I played with my creations I played with my vehicle rather than the minifigs, which I always thought of being very childish.

When I first heard the term 'minifig' I really had not a clue what the fuzz was all about. Why kids wanted them more and more and why the even became 'collectible to adults... I even thought the 'new', more expressive figures where ugly and an 'insult' to classic miniland figures. Up until I saw really cool afol builds. After my darkages I'm really starting to like em more and more, and now I'm even searching for particular ones. I've bought (small) sets just for the include minifigs... Who would've thought... I certainly didn't a year ago... I also think it's a good thing Lego emphasizes a lot on minifigs for kids nowadays. Although Kids will always be different, I think minifigs will give them more impulses to a creative playstyle. Just try to encourage them to keep on building and creating.

But for now I'm still not shure about the Friends-figurines... IMHO they don't have a good (read: lasting) design. I really wonder how sales would have gone if Lego had decided to use regular minifigs for the Friends-line. I still hope they end up doing that in the near future. I think the standard Lego-minifig is already very suitable and similar appealing to boys AND girls.

I have just bought the 66453 and the main decoy in one side of the box is a big Text Banner saying 8 minifigs in all the main languages. And in other side of the box the pic of the 8 minifigs (7 firemen and a damsel in distress).

In the Town forum I have written some replays talking about this. A lot of kids that bought LEGO are not builders and are not interested in MOCs, MODs or build and rebuild sets. They assemble the sets, because like with other toys, is something they have to do, but then they use them as playsets and the set, if completed, remains unalterable for long time.

And others, in continuous growing are only collectors. They bought the sets for some elements, the spaceships or the figures. And CMF is increasing this role.

I have read some topics in Eurobricks about that kids want figures with name because it represent a role to be identified with, as liked behavior/lifestyle or, as disliked behavior/lifestyle.

I think presently minifigures play a bigger role in Lego sets than they use to. Sure Lego has had minifigures in sets for a long time now, but have they always been so prominent? Lego just recently started introducing battle packs and blister packs with nothing but minifigures and a few weapons or accessories. They never had these before. Older sets never even displayed the figures prominently on the front of the packaging like they do now either. Heck, I remember as a kid trying to count the minifigures littered through a set because you only saw them interacting in the build. There was no nice display in the bottom or right part of the packaging. And like naf points out, older sets use to have 2-3 builds where as nowadays all sets except Creator only have a single build (and Creator has no minifigures...). I would say the emphasis use to be 25% on the figures and 75% on the build where as now it seems more 50/50.

I can't see where you get that perspective. Lego has had "battle packs" of minifigures since at least the days of my childhood (the early '90s), when you could buy a pack of Space- or Aquazone- or Pirates-themed minifigures and accessories through the shop-at-home catalog. And the boxes of that era displayed minifigures prominently, too: in fact, the largest sets of that era featured cut-out sections of the box where a plastic screen displayed all the most unique minifigures and accessories of the set. I just don't see a big difference between then and now, when all sets just have a lineup of images of the minifigures along the top of the box (making the figs harder to steal than they were back when they were packaged separately) and "battle packs" have only changed in their method of packaging and their wider distribution.

I thought Lego was spreading out the minifigures to make it harder for thieves to slit the boxes and steal just the minifigures?

If that is the intention, it doesn't work. I bought a set from Target recently to find too late that it had been tampered with. The entire first bag was gone, and there was a cut in the second so that the thief could remove the figure there.

If that is the intention, it doesn't work. I bought a set from Target recently to find too late that it had been tampered with. The entire first bag was gone, and there was a cut in the second so that the thief could remove the figure there.

That doesn't mean it doesn't work. That means that some thieves (not all), are determined enough to keep going. But even if they've only reduced the number of thieves, they've succeeded in part. And meanwhile, they've made it so that more are likely to be caught in the act. No method of theft-protection will be foolproof, of course (at least none that wouldn't be extremely inconvenient for honest consumers). But every little bit helps.

It isn't so much that the Minifigs changed how kids play, as it broadened the scope of how kids play with Lego products, and thereby broadened their desirability and market share. The reported minifig focused play styles have always been present with the kids. Do any of our nostalgic 80's space fans remember Fisher Prices classic Little People? It used the same play patern being observed with Lego, just the Lego allows greater flexibility in the scene and setting.

As a kid it was always a blanace really, because I wanted both the set AND the minifiugres. Usually it was that I wanted the build slightly more or the minifigures slightly more. Exo-force and Batman (2006) were a good example for me. In Exo-force, the minifigures looked awesome, and so did the robots, but the mech was the way more intriguing part. With Batman, however, I wanted the minifigures a bit more than the builds (though I DID want both) because I knew I could build some rainbow-coloured Batmobile with pieces from my own collection. I guess in the end it depends on the theme. Maybe he likes ninjago because it has cooler minifigures (even though that dragon is absolutely amazing), but superheores has more appealing builds (like the Lex Luthor Kryptonite suit, or the batmobile).

I think presently minifigures play a bigger role in Lego sets than they use to. Sure Lego has had minifigures in sets for a long time now, but have they always been so prominent? Lego just recently started introducing battle packs and blister packs with nothing but minifigures and a few weapons or accessories. They never had these before.

Lego has been producing minifig-only sets as long as I can remember. They were never marketed as "battle packs" just a pack of figures. If you bought a few of the sets in the theme, you probably had all those figures anyway.

I know my parents bought me a couple of these packs as a kid, I built a gigantic Lego town in my basement and my mom wanted to increase the population (my parents were very supportive of my Lego obsession as a kid ).

I think minifigures are more important than they used to be due to the increase in promenence of the “collectible” concept.

...

I feel that especially with the development of licensed sets that Lego has realized they can maximize sales by offering special or unique minifigures as a way to promote what may be otherwise perceived as bland sets. I could probably point to many sets licensed and non-licensed that I would feel have a heavier push with minifigures as maybe Lego needed to add more to those sets to make them more marketable.

Essentially, minifigures have become anothermethod by which TLG can market sets to a wider audience. Surely, with the SW license, many people (including myself) buy sets just for specific minifigures. To me this is a win-win, since it still promotes Lego sales.

I've noticed this, and I don't necessarily like this trend. I think it opens the door for Lego to put out less creative (and less appealing) builds, but put a couple of hard to find minifigs in to boost sales. I feel like the recent Hobbit sets have gone this route, the builds are less than inspired, but are full of unique minifigs.

As a kid in the 70's/80's, I never thought of the minifig as an important part of Lego. Just A part. For me it was the building of cars, spaceships, and houses that was the most important thing about 'playing' with Lego. The original sets would be build once, maybe twice. I've always wanted to build my own creations rather than the original sets. Even when I played with my creations I played with my vehicle rather than the minifigs, which I always thought of being very childish.

I was the same way. I thought of the figure as another piece of the build, because my spaceship wouldn't look right without an astronaut to pilot it.

When I watch my kids playing with their Ninjago Lego, I see them spending more time acting out scenes from the cartoon with the figures rather than building. I guess it's just a natural side effect of having a TV tie-in with the Ninjago sets. They don't do this with the Galaxy Squad Lego, although those sets have been collecting dust since they got into Ninjago.

For me, minifigs were - and still are - the most important part of any set. It's very rare I will buy a set of any sort without minifigs and when I do it's normally with adding minifigs in mind (like with some of the original Creator houses). The first thing I always do it seek out the minifig parts and put them together before even looking at the instructions or the rest of the parts.

When I was a kid the same applied and the minifigs were always the most important elements of mine and my brother's models and also of our play. Once a model or models had been built the games we played were all about the minifig's stories and interactions. I'm not at all surprised that this is still the same for kids today.

Cheers

Rog

Lego has been producing minifig-only sets as long as I can remember. They were never marketed as "battle packs" just a pack of figures. If you bought a few of the sets in the theme, you probably had all those figures anyway.

I know my parents bought me a couple of these packs as a kid, I built a gigantic Lego town in my basement and my mom wanted to increase the population (my parents were very supportive of my Lego obsession as a kid ).

I've noticed this, and I don't necessarily like this trend. I think it opens the door for Lego to put out less creative (and less appealing) builds, but put a couple of hard to find minifigs in to boost sales. I feel like the recent Hobbit sets have gone this route, the builds are less than inspired, but are full of unique minifigs.

I was the same way. I thought of the figure as another piece of the build, because my spaceship wouldn't look right without an astronaut to pilot it.

When I watch my kids playing with their Ninjago Lego, I see them spending more time acting out scenes from the cartoon with the figures rather than building. I guess it's just a natural side effect of having a TV tie-in with the Ninjago sets. They don't do this with the Galaxy Squad Lego, although those sets have been collecting dust since they got into Ninjago.

That classic space figure pack is quite interesting. That red spaceman has to be in one of the earliest unnatural minifig poses...

Edited January 5, 201411 yr by Cult_Of_Skaro