MAB

I imagine the architecture, but then the existing fountain garden feels a bit medieval like if you remove the fountain.

I think a small smooth dome is harder to remove than Egghead's dome and similarly when there is molded hair. I've got some third party parts that are like that and if you put them on a head they can be problematic to remove. Maybe that is why they don't do it.

Yeah it looks like it could well be the same line. I find those sets a little boring though, the plants in them are rather simple.

Probably ebay. With lots of clear photos so that the buyer can decide whether they are genuine or not.

I didn't say they couldn't have both. I was responding to the "big enough LOTR fans" comment that they would have the books. These are sets based on the movies and plenty of people have enjoyed the movies without reading the books, and consider themselves big fans.

I imagine that there are loads of LOTR fans that have bought the LEGO sets but have never read the books. I read them once 30+ years ago yet I have never owned a copy of the books. But I do own the BRs. Serious LEGO fans have LEGO shelves rather than bookshelves.

Yes they have been doing animal costume character minifigs for CNY but they have been doing them elsewhere too so they are not that distinctive. The pig was a rehashed CMF except for the tail. Doing something like a brick-built animal of say 400-500 parts in front of a small piece of architecture in similar colours to the animal with one obvious repeated "collectable" part that ties the entire series together would have hooked me. What they have done, I have two CNY sets and reuse them year after year like I reuse Christmas sets. I don't care for the costume minifigures so skipping sets is not a big deal.

It is so funny that they made a mistake with the show's catchphrase.

So if you want to combat this, then buy the set on day 1 yourself and keep the bits you want and sell the rest for what you consider a fair price.

No doubt there will be plenty of resellers buying then selling the GWP, the minifigures and the ship individually. Or you could buy the set and sell on the ship if you only want the figures.

Yes, if on PAB, then I'll get a few for generic dwarves. Although I already have a load of Gimli and Dain's torsos, as well as the CMF ones too.

I would have loved it if they had chosen a style and stuck with it for 12 years. One of my favourite sets was the 2013 Snake, with this part ... If they had committed to do a similar set for 12 years, each with a small animal themed build built around a "collectable" printed common piece such as that 8x8 circular tile, I would have been hooked in. Even better if they didn't put the date but just year of the X, so a set of 12 could be reused perpetually.

At least this year, Creator has gone away from small minifigure based sets. I think the smallest one they are doing now is the haunted house. And I don't mind that, as Creator should be about the build rather than the minifigures. I like that the smaller Creator sets focus on building with fairly basic parts, especially as there are small minifigure based sets containing cars, helicopters, etc in City and other ranges. A small wagon and a couple of soldiers, for example, is not really the idea of Creator especially if it only turns into another wagon and a different type of wagon and it doesn't fit with any other kid aimed sets. Creator (especially small sets) seems to be more about building again rather than there to supplement other themes. Now figures are easily purchased through PAB, adults have plenty of army building parts to supplement the big sets and similarly castle specific parts are easy to get that way too.

I guess the issue is how such a cheap set fits in with other similar cheap sets. Why would kids or parents buy a castle set when there are no other cheap castle sets for them toplay with alongside it? And it wouldn't fit in with City or Ninjago. Those cheap sets also get mass marketted in many retail stores. They want the popular ranges that kids are going to want.

Personally, I don't think it is a bad thing. Going beyond basic 2x4 and 2x2 bricks was good, but I find the introduction of so many new parts recently a bit annoying. On one hand it is nice that they exist to create a specific design, but on the other there are now so many different but similar parts it seems unnecessary.

That's fine. If you buy them to enjoy and enjoy them, and are then happy with the price you get when you sell them, then it does what you wanted it to do. Whereas if someone invests in LEGO and keeps new sets new to sell, or buys up old sets at 50% of retail price and then flips them for instant profit, it does what they want to do.

There probably is a fair bit of truth in it about not needing to spend money on patents and lawyers. If they make a new plate that is say and L shape and the mirror inverse as they need it for a particular build, so what if another company copies it. Instead of paying for legal, they get on with the set design instead and so what if another company uses a fairly obvious design. Having that part and stopping others from using it is not going to stop people buying from other companies so there is no real advantage to protecting it.

But if you are using new moulds and techniques that were not around when the theme was current then your designs do not look like they could have at the time, so is it the same theme? This is why it is sometimes better to call it neo-theme and use whatever parts and design styles you want. Different people do it in different ways. So do what makes you happy.

It depends on what parameters you want to set yourself. The majority of my collection is "new" in the sense that it is from 2005 onwards so I tend to MOC with new colours and not use the old. In that sense, my MOCs tend to be neo Classic Space or neo (insert theme name). If you are building MOCS for a theme that is no longer and want to restrict yourself only to colours that existed at the time, then personally I think you should restrict yourself also to only using parts that existed at the time.

Different types of sets have had different shelf times for a longbtime now, especially when there are no longer individual themes. It makes sense that a large and expensive flagship set gets a long time on shelves whereas a cheaper one does not, especially if the big one comes first. LKC can stand alone on shelves and doesn't really need other castle sets to help sell it. While MTS looks like it is missing something if it is the only castle set available. I think this is an issue now that individual themes are no longer a thing, and sets are not released and retired together.

I think there is a difference between a collector and an investor, even if both roles are the same person. I do both. Sets / minifigures / parts in my collection, I build and display. Sets and minifigures bought for investment, I don't assemble. There is no need to assemble investment minifigures. I keep them as new and let the buyer do it.

Near me, rarely saw D&D boxes on shelves and when I did it was the same few figures left in the box. Whereas F1, I still see multiple shelf boxes with hardly any taken out. Same for the newer Spiderverse CMF.

Why would they do a CMF instead of a set though? Take Snow White, you could get 12 characters with SW, 7 dwarves, Prince, huntsman and then the Evil Queen as both a queen and a witch. So they could do a CMF series OR they could do a one off set with 12 characters plus a load of bricks and charge more for it.

Not really my thing. The frog is OK. But they could be improved as animals instead of costumes with plain red heads or ones like these

As LEGO keep doing it, presumably it is to the liking of the target audience. I imagine they analyse sales data as a function of time and know what the decay is like for sets bought by adults vs for kids. If there is anything I want, I tend to buy in the first year and like most adults wouldn't need to save up. If they stop selling a set then release another, I am more likely to buy something in what would have been the second (or whatever) year.