What are the best LEGO sets released since 2020?: The shortlist

Castle or titanic, how can it be anything else? :-P

Great bouts. All with personal favourites other than 'Dungeons & Dragons vs. Lion Knights' Castle' where I couldn't give a hoot about either of them!

No typewriter and no big Bowser figure.... EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED...

I wonder what will win round 7…

Well, I’m happy; three out of my five nominations made it (Lion Knights’ Castle, Medieval Blacksmith, and Rivendell). Kind of shocked that Avengers Tower didn’t make it. Looking forward to the upcoming rounds!

@ickleb said:
"is it bad that i have 75% of that list?"

I have exactly 1 off that list. NInjago City Gardens. I'm rooting for it or Rivendell.

I'm hoping that either 10320 or 10497 take it. Not because those are the only two on the list that I own, but because they're great homages to Lego history.

Actually laughed seeing the 1 spot. Over Rivendell? Are you guys serious?

I cannot vote, so many great sets but I adore Starry Night.

@alLEGOry_HJB2810 said:
" @BabuBrick said:
"Well, I’m happy; three out of my five nominations made it (Lion Knights’ Castle, Medieval Blacksmith, and Rivendell). Kind of shocked that Avengers Tower didn’t make it. Looking forward to the upcoming rounds!"

I'm just sad that Tranquil Garden didn't make it."

Yeah, that’s a cool one.

Why, instead than using random numbers to couple the sets, not use a tennis-like seeding method using the preliminary voting stats to create a classification?
In this way the couples should be more balanced and the contest more engaging.

About the shortlist, I'm afraid that many sets I voted are not there, especially the city-space ones.
Anyway the first round couplings are very easy for me to decide.

@VaultDweller_197 said:
"This weirdly seems to have come to "the more expensive = The best sets"

Shame that, honestly, there are some cracking great smaller sets out there."

Well, if you tell a kid that they can pick whatever they want, but only one, toy from the store, what do you think they are going to grab? Small but awesome will never beat awesome AND big. Big just usually happens to be expensive.

forgot to vote, but I think all the sets I thought about are here, except diagon alley, which I wasn't sure if it was top 5 or not

@Calabar said:
"But, if you tell the kid that he/she can grab all he vants with a, for example, 500€ budget, are you sure he will choose a single 500€ set?"

Of course not, they might pick any of a million different superb combinations. But the task here was to find ONE set, and that is why people tend towards the bigger ones. If we want to hail smaller sets, the people that are picking must be asked a different question. Just trying to make it make sense.

I’m really excited for it! Match 6 is deceivingly tough, but match 4 is crazy. I hope the Galaxy Explorer pulls through, but this will be exciting!

RIP Temple of the Golden Idol, absolutely trashed in the first round probably x'DD To be fair, I don't think much here stands a chance against Rivendell, given all the love I've seen for that set in the comments ever since it was first announced; but even as impressive as it is I'd be very surprised if Indiana Jones can pull a win out from under LotR.

Still, more surprising things have happened, so maybe I shouldn't rule it out quite yet... ^^

My predictions on the results, in confidence order with the winning set on the left:

7. 10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell ~vs. 77015 Temple of the Golden Idol~
6. 10350 Tudor Corner ~vs. 10320 Eldorado Fortress~
1. 21325 Medieval Blacksmith ~vs. 75313 AT-AT~
3. 10294 Titanic ~vs. 76178 Daily Bugle~
5. 10305 Lion Knights' Castle ~vs. 21348 Dungeons & Dragons: Red Dragon's Tale~
2. 10283 NASA Space Shuttle Discovery ~vs. 10333 The Lord of the Rings: Barad-dûr~
4. 10497 Galaxy Explorer ~vs. 71741 NINJAGO City Gardens~
8. 75290 Mos Eisley Cantina ~vs. 21333 Vincent van Gogh - The Starry Night~

This is going to be fun!

I do own some of them (closer to 25% than to 75% as some others here :). Problem is, I haven't built any of them yet. Yes, I am that far behind...

@RTS013
It seems I'm not able to quote. I hope it is clear what I'm referring to.

I mean that the pool is for "the best set", and this involves various parameters in the evaluation.
In general I guess if I would spend its budget fot a specific set, considering every set affordable.
So a great set like the 76956 T-Rex Breakout (a pity it is not on the list) is very desirable for 100€ but I wouldn't take it into account for 200€. Maybe I would do for 150€, but probably I will prefer something other for that price.

So I think the problem is not how the question is posed, but which parameters people use to evaluate a set.

Interesting that not a single set from the 2020 list made it into this new 2025 list. Not even the 2020 winner.

I guess the consensus is that the best Lego sets have significantly increased in past the 5 years?

For the price of One AT-AT (the most expensive), you could have 8x Galaxy Explorers (the cheapest)
And for One Rivendell, 4.7x Galaxy Explorers.
But this isn't about price or value for money.

I've found this whole exercise to be fun and enlightening. I am so blessed to own 12 of these 16 with a near guarantee of moving that to 13. I would have initially expected 10335 Endurance and 21061 Notre Dame to at least make the short list but alas. Architecture has been limited to 1 or 2 sets per year these past 5 years so maybe it’s waning for folks? It’ll be curious to see if 21063 Neuschwantstein Castle changes anything.

Icons is more difficult to read as there are so many great sets, some are bound to simply be held back, due to no fault of their own. While the spice ran dry for some of those, Icons holds more than half the spots here. 10332 Medieval Town Square bests 10333 Bard-dur in both owned and wanted, but Barad-Dur rocks a great 4.7 rating so townsfolk will have to take shelter in the 10305 Lion Knight’s castle. While I didn't think this crop of modulars was good enough for my Top 5, 5,756 folks have already bought 10350 Tudor Corner and it's only been 6+ months. Though the last 4 modulars are much more owned, Tudor’s better Brickset rating of 4.5 (and possibly recency bias) were enough to put it over the top.

I usually wait for the modulars but that GWP 40757 Corner Kiosk with Tudor was simply too tempting. It appears 3,826 of those 5,756 agreed with me and bought Day 1 in order to get this GWP, making it the most sought after GWP so far this year, slightly ahead of 40767 Baby Astronaut and 40761 LotR Murder Twins. These are dwarfed though by last year's May the 4th GWP 40686 Trade Federation Troop Carrier at 9,786 and 2022's 40566 Ray the Castaway at 11,145.

We apparently love Ideas. 21324 Medieval Blacksmith is owned by 20,343 members with almost another 5,000 still wanting it. 21333 The Starry Night then clocks in at 9,847 and 3,627. While only 4,149 of us own (3,218 want) 21348 Dungeons & Dragons, it is significantly trailing the less expensive 21338 A-Frame which over 23 months amassed 9,066 ownership and an additional 4,027 wants. While price and recency might be holding D&D back, the love for it is clearly strong.

I’m surprised that no BLDP sets made the cut as some of these sets are so beloved. Perhaps people (like me) felt only regular sets should be considered here. The broken query and date range confusion may have also played a part. I saw many a vote for 21322 Pirates of Barracuda Bay, which was not eligible due to just having made the cutoff on the last vote.

I would be happy if any of these 16 sets win but my personal preference would be 76178 Daily Bugle, followed by 75290 Mos Eisley, 10283 Space Shuttle, 10305 Lion Knight’s Castle, and 10320 Eldorado Fortress.

@Calabar said:
"I mean that the pool is for "the best set", and this involves various parameters in the evaluation.
In general I guess if I would spend its budget fot a specific set, considering every set affordable.
So a great set like the 76956 T-Rex Breakout (a pity it is not on the list) is very desirable for 100€ but I wouldn't take it into account for 200€. Maybe I would do for 150€, but probably I will prefer something other for that price.

So I think the problem is not how the question is posed, but which parameters people use to evaluate a set. "

I love small and affordable sets too. My 5 suggestions did include some. But because of how the question is asked, since it doesn't define any parameters to go by, it's very natural that larger sets have a better chance to succeed. If you start by sorting out all sets that are good from the ones that are less good, and then start to compare them against each other, the small ones will have a hard time to make the top 16 out of 1000's of contenders. You said so yourself.

@Calabar said:
"...Large sets have fewer constraints, have to face less compromises than low budget sets. ..."

Those are exactly the kind of aspects that would tend to give things a chance to be perceived as... how do I put this... "better". Right?

Darn, I was really hoping 21338 A-Frame Cabin would make the cut. :(

I'll tell my Happy Plants they didn't make the cut. They won't be happy.

My favourite is Galaxy Explorer, followed closely by Rivendell and Lion Knights Castle.

Surprised Starry Night and Temple of the Golden Idol made it.

I only own 4 of the sets on the list, I guess it just shows my reluctance to buy big expensive sets.

I only own seven of the sixteen, I guess my tastes don't align with most other people's.

All great sets, but not enough people appreciate 76968 :(

Huh, no cheap sets on this short list? Who would've guessed...? ;-)

@RTS013
As you quoted above, I agee large sets have better chance, for various reasons.
What I want to say is that small sets have not chance if the judgement is based on set's size. It is not a wishlist where you choose to pick a set with a greater value.
If someone would ask me what present I would prefer I would surely pick the UCS AT-AT instead than te Galaxy Explorer because of its greater value, even if I think the Galaxy Explorer is a better set.

@VaultDweller_197 said:
"This weirdly seems to have come to "the more expensive = The best sets"

Shame that, honestly, there are some cracking great smaller sets out there."

Yeah, as much as I love 10497, 60430 is also awesome. And not only is it cheaper, it's still on the shelves!

@Wellspring said:"Interesting that not a single set from the 2020 list made it into this new 2025 list. Not even the 2020 winner.

I guess the consensus is that the best Lego sets have significantly increased in past the 5 years?"

Look at the title of the article.

@TheOtherMike said:
" @Wellspring said:"Interesting that not a single set from the 2020 list made it into this new 2025 list. Not even the 2020 winner.

I guess the consensus is that the best Lego sets have significantly increased in past the 5 years?"

Look at the title of the article."

I mean, 2020 sets *were* able to be nominated. Mos Eisley Cantina is up there after all.

Curses, the only two I own are up against each other.

My picks for the first round would be: (surely many will disagree with that but we'll see...)
1. 75313
2. 10283
3. 10294
4. 10497 (very difficult choice to make even though I'm space crazy)
5. 10305 (also a very difficult choice)
6. 10350
7. 10316
8. 75290

Ultimately, 10316 will most likely win but it will be interesting to see what sets move forward. I own 6 of them and if I am lucky enough, I should get 3 more before they are retired. (I do not collect Star Wars sets and was surprised to see I had two in there)

ABR

Anything but Rivendell

Lol

Tough break for 77015 matching up with 10316

That's the one Indiana Jones set I don't have in my collection and it is absolutely gorgeous. Rivendell will go far in this tourney

Only two sets I own....and only one of those I deemed worthy of a nomination, as the other one does have a whole bunch of rather sticky flaws....

@Emmafofemma said:
"RIP 10281 Bonsai Tree"

Yeah... The bracket not including that just shows how completely invalid it is.

Oh no, my top two picks, Temple of the Golden Idol and Rivendell, are up against one another in the first round!

My Top 16...
- 77015 INDIANA JONES TEMPLE OF THE GOLDEN IDOL
(Iconic opening movie scene, play-features/lots of action, fun to build, display worthy)
- 10316 THE LORD OF THE RINGS RIVENDELL
(I feel THE most beautiful Lego set ever made. The design, aesthetics, details galore, minifigures excellent, the colors. Display worthy by far).
- 10305 LION KNIGHTS' CASTLE
( A Lego castle just doesn't get better than this. Beautiful fun build, nicely designed rooms, hidden details, working drawbridge, excellent exterior detailing stone/rock work, choke full of figures and a micro Yellow Castle!).
- 10497 GALAXY EXPLORER
(A great updated design from the previous classic iteration. Fun to build, play AND display. Was a great price to boot)
- 75375 MIDI-SCALED MILLENNIUM FALCON
(If you never got the UCS version, this is your best bet. For the size, it's an incredible looking display model, with greebling galore. The details at this size just don't get any better. And YES, it is swooshable. Have fun with it, then have fun looking at it on your desk. An almost perfect model).
- 21348 DUNGEONS & DRAGONS RED DRAGON'S TALE
(WOW, a great castle, play and display that's a GAME too!? Just excellent. So much fun here. RPG fans and anyone just looking for something different to play with, get this! Oh and you get the Eye of the Beholder too!).
- 31212 THE MILKY WAY GALAXY
(Amazing parts usage, recolors all used to create a beautiful interesting art piece of the Milky Way. A fun, aesthetically pleasing build).
- 75313 AT-AT
(THE ultimate Star Wars troop carrier. The iconic At-At in all its glory. Commands the room).
- 76269 AVENGERS TOWER
(The height, details and figures. Top of the line Marvel right here).
- 10294 TITANIC
(Great build. Lego did a great job getting that curve of the hull right. Lovely micro interior and exterior details. The look on display...wow!)
- 10276 COLOSSEUM
(Another that commands the room. Aesthetically a great display model. Look to the West, Lego fans! Don't be a fool, look to Rome!).
- 21333 VINCENT VAN GOGH THE STARRY NIGHT
(Great job layering bricks and plates with beautiful colors to try to recreate this famous painting. Great on display relief sculpture).
- 76419 HOGWARTS CASTLE AND GROUNDS
(A great scale, details and great look on display. Lots of fun details throughout.)
- 10333 THE LORD OF THE RINGS BARAD DUR
(Commands your attention when in the room. The Eye of Sauron never looked so good).
- 10358 TRANSFORMERS SOUNDWAVE
(Even though it just came out, wow, a great build, a great toy. Incredible and fun).
- 92176 NASA APOLLO SATURN V
(a re-release but still one of THE best Lego models ever produced. Great build, great on display and a teaching model as well).

@MisterBrickster said:
" @Octane_Thermoplastic said:
"Given that all the sets are nearly/ over £100. I think it would be interesting to see a bracket for under £100 at some point, would be a lot of fun to see users advocate for sets that aren’t the huge behemoths.

That being said very interested to see these bouts unfold!"

I'd love to see this as well.

I definitely nominated some smaller sets in my list. I guess as there's usually more small sets than big ones, if everyone nominates a mix you're just more likely to end up with big sets getting more votes, as there are fewer to choose from."

Agreed on that. As suspected, getting a generic poll from a AFOL centric fansite will basically result in sets with large piece counts and/or high priced sets.

As AFOLs are more excited to see their favourite big sets in the top spot than a $30 City set, the poll is just preaching to the choir so maybe have this generic poll and then another different one with said conditions of below certain price point or under a set piece count would be more interesting.

Well, I guess we all know Rivendell is the favourite, but my underdog pick was Temple of the Golden Idol. I was seriously hoping it would make it a little further at least.

@Andrusi said:
" @Huw said:
" @Cergorach said:
"Just to make sure for future reference: LLMs do random numbers very poorly, they are not actual random numbers. Computers already kinda suck at random number generation, but LLMs are on a whole other level, it's asking someone for a random number and them repeating their favorite numbers. Next time either use a proper random number generator, use dice (a D20) or just use a deck of cards..."

OK -- not too critical for this application. At least it succeeded in doing so without error..."

For future instances, I'd recommend random.org's list randomizer.

You know, assuming we aren't all legally compelled to use LLMs for all tasks by then so that idiot billionaires don't have to feel sad."

As an avid RPG player (even if I haven't been able to go to a game since my stroke), I say break out the dice!

I own ALL of these, except AT-AT, Daily Bugle, and Medieval Blacksmith!…
But I’ve barely built a single one of them!
No space or time now!
:((

Yeah that’s more or less the shortlist I expected the Brickset audience to generate. Actually, saying that, I’m surprised there’s not a train on there; Orient Express not impressive enough to make the cut?

The biggest surprise to me is Starry Night, not because it isn't great, but because it doesn't seem that popular on Brickset - it doesn't get anywhere near as many mentions of some of the others.
I still predict the final will be Rivendell vs Galaxy Explorer and Rivendell will narrowly win, causing endless arguments in the comment thread.

Would be interesting to see how these 16 stack up against the top 16 eligable sets ranked by the overall rating.....are there any hidden gems that are generally rated highly but lack the popularity to make it here?

Four of my five made the list but come on people, Jaws 21350! Maybe I am just showing I am pushing my age of almost 60!

I was scrambling for my Brickset password to express my disbelief at Pirates of Barracuda Bay not making the bracket. I appreciate the previous poster above who explained that it was ineligible because it was on the last bracket 5 years ago! I remember it doing quite well. It's my favorite set of all time, coming from a Lego lover since the early 90s.

These are (mostly) all nice too. I'll decide how to vote in the moment with each poll. Bummed not to see a D2C Mario set represented here, but expected. Would the NES have qualified based on release date? I can't be too broken up about it anyway because I didn't vote, so I guess I'm part of the problem. hashtagamericanpolitics

Predictions:

75313 AT-AT will beat 21325 Medieval Blacksmith

10333 The Lord of the Rings: Barad-dûr will beat 10283 NASA Space Shuttle Discovery

76178 Daily Bugle will beat 10294 Titanic

71741 NINJAGO City Gardens will beat 10497 Galaxy Explorer

10305 Lion Knights' Castle will beat 21348 Dungeons & Dragons: Red Dragon's Tale

10350 Tudor Corner will beat 10320 Eldorado Fortress

10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell will beat 77015 Temple of the Golden Idol

75290 Mos Eisley Cantina will beat 21333 Vincent van Gogh - The Starry Night

Going further:

10333 The Lord of the Rings: Barad-dûr will beat 75313 AT-AT

71741 NINJAGO City Gardens will beat 76178 Daily Bugle

10305 Lion Knights' Castle will beat 10350 Tudor Corner

10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell will beat 75290 Mos Eisley Cantina

Semis:

71741 NINJAGO City Gardens will beat 10333 The Lord of the Rings: Barad-dûr

10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell will beat 10305 Lion Knights' Castle

Final:

10316 The Lord of the Rings: Rivendell will beat 71741 NINJAGO City Gardens

I have 13 of the 16. This is going to be tough.

Top three should be Daily Bugle, Mos Eisley Cantena, and NINJAGO City Gardens. All are highly detailed, chock full of minifigs and references, and do a wonderful job of showcasing their respective properties or universes.

My personal favorite is Daily Bugle - also and sadly the only one of the three (or 16) I own - however they could rank in any order and I’d be happy with the result.

@CarolinaOnMyMind said:
" @oldtodd33 said:
"I only own seven of the sixteen, I guess my tastes don't align with most other people's. "

I own zero of the sixteen. I guess my budget doesn’t align with most other people’s. "

I have two of the sixteen, although it's less about cost and more about space in my case. Although, since one of the two I own is 10497, it's also about Space!

@TheOtherMike said:
" @CarolinaOnMyMind said:
" @oldtodd33 said:
"I only own seven of the sixteen, I guess my tastes don't align with most other people's. "

I own zero of the sixteen. I guess my budget doesn’t align with most other people’s. "

I have two of the sixteen, although it's less about cost and more about space in my case. Although, since one of the two I own is 10497, it's also about Space!"

I save my Insider points and usually only buy sets from Lego direct when double VIP are active. I walked out of the Lego Store close to me with 10316 Rivendell FREE of charge. I also have to keep my collection focused because I'm also running out of space.

@Huw said:
" @twodoors said:
"Why didn't you just rank them based on votes received and then do bouts 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15, 3 vs 14 and so on (just like they do in a tennis tournament using seeds)? That would have been the most accurate way to do it. This way, you're going to knock out sets that don't deserve to be eliminated in the first round. Just my 2 cents worth, its' your site & your rules. Looking forward to voting. Bring the bouts on!"

That would reveal the favourites and I'd suggest that that is not desirable. It's not a test of skill between sets like tennis is between players!

We might as well just skip the bouts and just declare the winner as the one with the most votes, but where's the fun in that?!"

It will be interesting to see if the winner was the one with the most votes in the selection tound. Tactical and negative voting might well play a part especially in in-house vs movie franchise head to heads.

I voted for Barracuda Bay. I'm surprised more didn't like that one. But they chose a different Pirates set, so I guess the nostalgia of the theme is still covered.

71741 Ninjago City Gardens is the best set overall! It's got everything, looks, minifigs, colors, tree, number of pieces, price as new, nostalgia Easter eggs,...

I nominated five sets. None made the shortlist.
Only one of my five has a higher piece count than the smallest set here (Galaxy Explorer).
AFOLs are so predictable...

I haven't seen this posted anywhere else yet, but if anyone is interested in comparing all the sets in one place, here's a quick query I made, sorted by ascending set number:

https://brickset.com/sets/query-11640

Edit:
Just in case anyone stumbles upon this article in the future, here're a couple more queries of the same 16 sets:

Ascending (UK) price:
https://brickset.com/sets/query-11641

Ascending number of pieces:
https://brickset.com/sets/query-11642

Ascending PPP (UK):
https://brickset.com/sets/query-11643

Queries are fun and more people should have a play with them :-)

And I'll just leave one final query here: popularity. This is sorting by ascending quantity who own (or possibly total number of sets owned, which may take into account more than one copy - not sure).

Anyway, this is a query whose results will change over time as more sets are sold, particularly for the most recently-released sets (e.g. 10350 Tudor Corner will almost certainly climb this list!)

https://brickset.com/sets/query-11646

@Huw said:
" @twodoors said:
"Why didn't you just rank them based on votes received and then do bouts 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15, 3 vs 14 and so on (just like they do in a tennis tournament using seeds)? That would have been the most accurate way to do it. This way, you're going to knock out sets that don't deserve to be eliminated in the first round. Just my 2 cents worth, its' your site & your rules. Looking forward to voting. Bring the bouts on!"

That would reveal the favourites and I'd suggest that that is not desirable. It's not a test of skill between sets like tennis is between players!

We might as well just skip the bouts and just declare the winner as the one with the most votes, but where's the fun in that?!"

I would argue that thre random pairing makes the contest even more predictable because if 2 lesser sets go up against each other early it will be a complete blowout when they hit a legitimate contender. The initial nomination was 5 sets, which doesn't necessarily mean that the most popular ones will win when put head to head since those 5 sets are individually ranked 1 through 5 by each submitter.