MaxHeadroom

I've had the same issue. I'll take brickbuilt objects over novelty minifigure scale sets and remakes any day since brickbuilt sets are at least easy to skip. For that reason I'm relieved that the D2C is a collection of brickbuilt objects (wizard candy is a good suggestion so I wouldn't be surprised if that was what it is). 2021 is already an expensive enough year for minifigure scale collectors when including the moments sets. I'm a bit disappointed that the inevitable golden dumbledore figure will probably be exclusive to it but it won't be too painful to not have the full golden collection, the same way I probably won't have the full collection of cards everyone has already forgotten about. Something that worries me that hasn't been discussed yet is Hagrid's hut retiring this year. I can't see LEGO having Hagrid's hut unavailable for more than a year so I would guess we're getting a remake of it next year which doesn't bode well for the deathly hallows/2018-2020 Hogwarts wave many were hoping for.

What's the point of a fluffy set with no trapdoor or a trapdoor that doesn't lead to the devil's snare? The set is very clearly recreating the original forbidden corridor set down to the basic shape and tower structure. The top floor has a small roof now but it's still short enough for fluffy's heads to clear. Fluffy's room being on the top level like the original set would also explain why the harp is a side-build so the set could be displayed without it peeking over the roof. Why wouldn't LEGO also recreate the lower level of the original set? LEGO is clearly comfortable integrating trapdoor features into the new system so why wouldn't they do it here? Especially when there is a room directly beneath the trapdoor included in the set unlike the Girl's bathroom set. The focus of both the 2001 set and the scene in the film is the trio going through the trapdoor into the devil's snare. Why not recreate that? A small chamber of the winged keys could then replace the staircase from the original set. We also know the chess board can connect to the other sets (presumably there are some holes for technic pins) so why would LEGO include a gap in the challenges when the chamber of the winged keys would be very easy to recreate? Obviously we don't know for certain if the devil's snare and chamber of the winged keys will be included but saying they're unlikely and practically impossible is incredibly extreme.

Assuming we get the devil's snare and winged keys in the forbidden corridor set, the only challenge from the film we won't have is the mirror. Maybe it could be included on the inside of the flying lesson set if that comes with a section of the castle?

Yes, while I enjoy minifigures the builds are what I buy LEGO for. I'll be keeping the new castle separate though the same way I keep the 2001,2010, and 2018 castles separate from each other. Even having seen the prelims I think it's hard to get excited for these builds because we haven't seen the interiors yet which seem to be the focus. It seems like a large number of people like the bathroom set and I don't think that would be the case if we had only seen the outer wall.

White and brown owls are shown in the preliminary image, I doubt they will bring back the black owl but maybe they could make a new grey owl/bring back the 2010 grey owl?

4x4 fquare, not 6x6 We know the squares are at least twice the size of 3x3 so it's going to be at least 6x6 not 4x4. We've literally been told the chess element is going to be far more substantial than people were expecting (when making only part of the board and a castle expansion was being suggested) and that each square will be at least 6x6 which is already a lot without castle expansion parts. You're the one setting yourself up for disappointment if you're still expecting a playset at this point. The board is at most 8 studs shorter than the Great Hall/chamber of secrets and Forbidden corridor sets combined. Maybe this would've been a reasonable expectation when the set was $250 but $70? There would need to be some real magic for that to happen.

This is basically what I was originally expecting if it was a chess focused set. The issue now is that squares on the pirates set are all 4x4 while the HP squares are apparently at least 6x6 which leads to a significantly larger board and larger game pieces. It will be interesting to see how LEGO pulls this off. How would you make a 6x6 square out of four pieces? I was expecting a single 6x6 tile (maybe modified to include a single stud like a jumper plate). Also has a 48x48 base plate ever been used in a set before? It would give the chess set quite a large box.

I guess this means the set is exclusively a functional chess set and not castle expansion/playset? Is this set effectively a brickbuilt version of the Noble Collection chess set (which is around the same size) with the high piece count going into detailed chess pieces? Let me spoil the ending for you; the person with the info that isn't available to the general public is going to be right. Plus it's not an argument I'm just trying to clarify the info we've been getting.

In a $70 set? If the board was reduced to 16 squares maybe that could work but it would still be 24x24. A full chess board would be 48x48 which would be insane for $70 set, especially one with such a large part count, unless the rest of the parts are all 1x1 tiles. A 48x48 base plate alone is sold for $15 and that's a assuming LEGO would use a base plate as the foundation rather than standard plates. 48x48 is the size of the LEGO art sets (if I've done my math right) which are nearly twice the price of this and don't include builds for chess pieces. I guess this means it won't be a full useable board and that the chess set will actually be a playset of a reduced chess board? Do you know something we don't or did you just massively underestimate the size of a chess board if the squares were all 6x6?

I had considered 3x3 but while I'm sure the pieces will be scaled down they still need to be large enough for Ron to ride a horse which I'm not sure could be done at the 3x3 scale.

I meant the number of squares on the board not the number of studs. I would imagine the chess squares being 4x4 each and with four of those the board would be 16x16 studs. I think it all depends on if LEGO wants this to actually be something people can play chess with or a Harry Potter playset featuring the chess scene. As for the cards (tiles or literal cards, I would prefer the latter as they would be easier to ignore) I think my reaction to them will depend exclusively on how many cards there are to collect and how they are distributed. If I could get a full set or almost a full set from just buying the June wave then I wouldn't mind them and would probably even track down remaining cards if I was missing one or two. If there are 10+ cards and some of them are rarer than others then I think this could just be a really annoying gimmick in a year already filled with gimmicks (gold figures, Hogwarts moments, sweater redesigns, etc.)

The chess set could go two ways, it could either be a full chess set or a set of challenges with a condensed chess board. If the set is minifigure scale the chess pieces will need to be large enough for Ron to ride a horse since that is one of the more iconic parts of that scene and I can't see a full minifigure scale chess board at that price. If there are two rows of chess pieces I could see the board being 6x6 and if it's a single row maybe as small as 4x4. I won't get my hopes up for a minifigure scale set with a reduced chess board and other challenges but it seems plausible. Last year we got a wave of minifigure scale sets with a brick built exclusive so I could see this brick built wave having a minifigure scale exclusive.

At this point we've seen seven figures and if Tom Riddle's legs are the worst thing about them then we've got some very good figures.

I would guess that very few people buying the chess set will be buying it for the minifigures regardless of how many there are or how exclusive they are. Depending on how integrated it is with Hogwarts (if it's just a few pinholes that would make it connectable to the other sets or if it includes other challenges) I wouldn't be surprised if a large number of the people buying it weren't even buying it for the Harry Potter license but just because it's a realistic chess board made of LEGO.

At the moment my 3 favorite sets would be Hogsmeade, Hogwarts Castle/chamber of secrets, and the girls bathroom. I think my ranking will change when we actually see the interior of the sets though. While the 2021 Hogwarts set is arranged like the 2001 Hogwarts castle and has some references to it it's far more similar to the standalone Hogwarts expansions from the early 2000s than the original castle. The 2001 castle was meant to be viewed from the outside (in the original pamphlets included with the sets the exterior of Hogwarts was shown alongside the interior of every other castle set) but the 2021 set seems to be more dedicated to the interchangeable interior format. As for the buildable August stuff I'm very relieved. They're both incredibly easy passes and I would rather have that then minifigure scale set remakes with just enough new stuff to tempt me. I have no clue why Harry and Hermionie are the focus though. I'm looking forward to finding out why that's the case, I can't really think of a scene that's just between the two of them in the early films.

That's what I thought too, although it's possible the bar could also be for the pixie.

1. I totally agree that the pixie should be sand blue but I still like it. Hopefully there will be at least two. I guess this means we no longer have to speculate about a Lockhart CMF? 2. I'm very happy about the D2C being such an easy skip and if this is the best set from August then I could be saving quite a bit of money. Some people have mentioned including the other challenges with it but I really hope that doesn't happen. Sacrificing all of the customers who would be interested in a generic chess set (I imagine the set will be like the noble collection set which is generic enough) probably isn't worth dedicating parts to chunks of the chambers in an attempt to win over HP collectors who can ignore the set otherwise. I do hope we get all of the other challenges though at some point, hopefully including a condensed chess board like the 2001 set, and if we're really lucky a reference to the potion chamber. My main fear with the chess set is that LEGO will make the challenge variants of the trio exclusive to that set and not include them with the forbidden corridor remake. If LEGO does feel the need to include exclusive figures with the chess set I would like to see torn/bloody variants of the trio with clean versions included with the forbidden corridor.

Of course we finally get new info while I'm busy for a few days. I wonder if the stars on the golden torsos are the only reference to the original stars that we'll be getting. It seems a bit odd to have them pasted there at all, especially if it's just on these golden figures and not the standard ones included with the sets. Also I guess this confirms the sets will include the moments versions of the torsos? It will be nice to have a moments torso for Hufflepuff. As for tomorrow's stream I'm not going to get my hopes up for anything amazing. It will probably mostly be pushing the DA, Moments, and Art sets and a nostalgic look at the theme overall followed by a hint about more things coming soon. Maybe if we're lucky they'll show a gold minifigure or the new Hogwarts castle set.

It wasn't. I had only read the post I was responding to and the proceeding ones when I wrote the comment.

If people can't remember why they're complaining about the new sets then they shouldn't still be complaining about them. People not saving the photos would explain why the few things that are discussed here are so general. 90% of the discussion has just been posts saying that the new sets are not the same as the 2018-2020 sets/like the 2001 sets/surprising/boxy/have green roofs which were all things we knew from the leaked description and even discussed at the time. It's just a bit depressing that any time the sets are mentioned it's just to randomly say they're bad with little reasoning, wonder if we're getting the old style back next year, or repeat the same few complaints we had before we even saw the preliminaries. Any time I have to read yet another essay about how the sets are blocky and not like the 2018-2020 sets I can't help but wonder how much more interesting this thread could be if we could just get past those surface complaints. Why not talk about the small spire which looks pasted onto the side of the side of the staircase tower or the brown owl platform pasted on the other side? The tiles in the middle of the larger spire which might mean it's removable like the 2001 version? The 2x6 plate on the great hall that isn't at the same angle as the rest of the roof? The way the rocks fade down on the staircase tower? How many tables will fit in the Great Hall? I could keep going but I'll leave it there.

The number of posts complaining about Hogwarts have decreased but they're still popping up. The only opinions of the June sets stated in the last 24 hours were "I just don't like the build design of Hogwarts buildings" and "we're getting a new line of much worse Hogwarts sets". They're both criticizing the sets but they're also both completely useless and I can understand how they could come off as whiny. Just saying that the new Hogwarts design is bad/not as good as the old one offers nothing of value. It's the level of criticism I would expect from children in a YouTube comments section. What about the design is bad? What makes them worse than the older sets? If people still feel the need to keep complaining about them a month and a half after the descriptions leaked and a month after the prelims leaked it wouldn't hurt if those criticisms went a bit beyond just saying that they're bad. It would also really be good if those complaints were things that haven't already been discussed to death.

Riddle was already made last year (and is either being rereleased or remade this year).

We speculated what they would be if they were from DH, what they would be if they weren't from DH, if it was our best list, if it was our worst list, if there was a set form every movie, if it was all anniversary themed, if it was buildable figures, if everything was focused on Dobby, if the $30 set was a Hogwarts moments flying class, and probably a hundred other slight variations. How many potential variants of "what would your best/worst august setlist be if X?" questions are still remaining? Don't get me wrong, I'm not a massive fan of the alternative discussion routes which seem to just be complaining about the lack of leaks/people complaining about other people complaining about the lack of leaks and repeating everything from last year (KNN, the custom Muggles are our friends tile, Lockhart, Pomfrey, and FB in the next CMF) but there isn't much left to speculate about until we get new information. Once set names come the speculation won't end, there would still be figures, what the builds will be like, etc. I can certainly wait awhile for set names to be released but I also don't think delaying that would decrease our speculation and activity.

Some people had the idea of Newt being his school-robes self with a bowtruckle as accessory, great way to get Hufflepuff colours Weren't the robes in FB dark blue instead of black?

We've known what figures were coming in the Hogsmeade set since the names and descriptions leaked. Early versions of the figures were also shown in the preliminary images.