Random figure of the day: cas399

Upawn my word!

2 "orcs" in 1 week, sweet

Michelangelo after being mutated a second time.

While this minifigure may have been unique to 852293, the parts needed to recreate him weren’t. You could get them across a number of Fantasy Era sets. It would be cool if RFotD indicated when figures contained a part only available in one set - or even no set at all, e.g. BAM only. A unique combination of common parts is not as interesting as a figure that’s genuinely unique.

I feel like TLG is trolling us by not calling this an orc.

Castle was really cool back in the day cos it was the closest thing we had to Lego Lord of the Rings.

@Zander said:
"While this minifigure may have been unique to 852293, the parts needed to recreate him weren’t. You could get them across a number of Fantasy Era sets. It would be cool if RFotD indicated when figures contained a part only available in one set - or even no set at all, e.g. BAM only. A unique combination of common parts is not as interesting as a figure that’s genuinely unique."

That would be a lot of work. If it really interests you, it's easy to look up the figure's inventory on Bricklink.

I was just looking at some fantasy era sets the other day. Never got any of them, and boy do I wish I did. If only Lego would bring this style of Castle back.

@TheOtherMike said:
" @Zander said:
"While this minifigure may have been unique to 852293, the parts needed to recreate him weren’t. You could get them across a number of Fantasy Era sets. It would be cool if RFotD indicated when figures contained a part only available in one set - or even no set at all, e.g. BAM only. A unique combination of common parts is not as interesting as a figure that’s genuinely unique."

That would be a lot of work. If it really interests you, it's easy to look up the figure's inventory on Bricklink."

Rebrickable does note which elements are rare. Compare this inventory:

https://rebrickable.com/minifigs/fig-002188/omac/parts

…to this inventory:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?M=sh0523

Bricklink shows new elements for a while when they first show up, but I don’t know when that flag expires.

@PurpleDave said:
" @TheOtherMike said:
" @Zander said:
"While this minifigure may have been unique to 852293, the parts needed to recreate him weren’t. You could get them across a number of Fantasy Era sets. It would be cool if RFotD indicated when figures contained a part only available in one set - or even no set at all, e.g. BAM only. A unique combination of common parts is not as interesting as a figure that’s genuinely unique."

That would be a lot of work. If it really interests you, it's easy to look up the figure's inventory on Bricklink."

Rebrickable does note which elements are rare. Compare this inventory:

https://rebrickable.com/minifigs/fig-002188/omac/parts

…to this inventory:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?M=sh0523

Bricklink shows new elements for a while when they first show up, but I don’t know when that flag expires."
What I do is look at each piece and see how many sets it comes in, one by one.

@PurpleDave said:
"I feel like TLG is trolling us by not calling this an orc."

Is there something trademarked about the term ‘orc’? The same way the Tolkein estate owns the rights to call things ’hobbits’. Thought that was why Warhammer called them ‘orks’ with a k like that to get around it?

Still have a copy of this set sealed. It's impressive in the big book box, like a Gutenberg Bible.

Fitting that this gets recommended during my Middle-earth marathon.

@Brickalili "Orc" isn't trademarked. There have been CMFs and Ninjago minifigs called "orcs." "Troll warrior" and "Ork" were probably chosen for uniqueness/creating a brand.

@Trigger_ said:
"Fitting that this gets recommended during my Middle-earth marathon.

@Brickalili "Orc" isn't trademarked. There have been CMFs and Ninjago minifigs called "orcs." "Troll warrior" and "Ork" were probably chosen for uniqueness/creating a brand."

That trademark @Brickalili mentioned is why Dungeons & Dragons called its short guys "halflings" instead of "hobbits," but D&D has been using "orcs" for fifty years without trouble. Just looked up the word "orc" on Wikipedia, and it's an Anglo-Saxon word, and it was used (just once, but it was still used) in Beowulf.

@Brickalili said:
" @PurpleDave said:
"I feel like TLG is trolling us by not calling this an orc."

Is there something trademarked about the term ‘orc’? The same way the Tolkein estate owns the rights to call things ’hobbits’. Thought that was why Warhammer called them ‘orks’ with a k like that to get around it?"

The word “orc” is an Anglo-Saxon word that’s possiblyderived from the Latin “Orcus”. The first use in a modern work of fiction is “The Princess and the Goblin” by George MacDonald, which was published as a magazine serial starring in 1870, and as a bound novel in 1872. So that beat Tolkien’s single use in the original version of The Hobbit by just a few years.

And “ork” is a word from Austrian folklore, so if Wqrhammer did change the spelling for purposes of trademarking the word (as I’m pretty sure I heard years ago), that would be grounds to permanently revoke it. So maybe just for flavor? Looks like Warhammer orks are an alien species and not a fantasy goblinoid.

But the core issue, I believe, is that Scandinavian culture probably knows “troll” and not “orc”. So to Denmark, they’re all the same thing regardless of size. Or D&D stat blocks.