Yep.

Does someone have any cool facts about this one?

Imagine this set with todays pieces and colors! Even I as a casual observer of castle couldnt help but pick that up.

My favourite castle. I had so much fun with this set as a boy. Now, my daughters' play with it and 71008 , Classic King rules the roost.

One of my first LEGO sets and really a great play set. I rebuilt about 5 years ago with the kids, but might be time to do it again.

Ahh. My first set. Soo worn out now. Had to use a safety pin to separate the parts when I was a kid.

Yay..my first LEGO set. Still remember when I got it. Rebuilt it a few years ago. Sitting proudly (as a kings set should) on top of the shelf??.
But also a good example of how more complex and more interesting building techniques have become in 40 years.

I'm kind of in between when it comes to these older sets. I mean, I have enough spare parts to modify them and add small details here and there but the purist in me prohibits any intervention. Right now what I do is I apply very little modifications that can be reversed easily.

Genuinely impressed by just how many minifigs come with this set. Do any other big castles even get close to actually feeling properly garrisoned like this one?

My first big set and easily one of my favourites, my set was all yellowed with broken or cracked pieces and faded minifigures so I bought another one (luckily for faaaar cheaper than those bricklink prices) and recently I found most of the pieces in a bulk lot (just missing some grey bricks and one yellow lion shield) so now me and my sons can each have one :-)
If only they had widened that gate so the carts (some of which came out in the very same year so they could have seen that coming) could enter the castle...

Oh man one of the sets I really enjoyed playing with in my childhood. I still have it off course but it's not assembled. I checked the sets released that year and I was stunned to find out I owned 8 out of 10. I really need more room so I could assemble all my old sets from the eighties and seventies (yes I am that old). The nineties were my dark days, but I still bought the odd lego set, until Star Wars the Phantom Menace lego came out in 1999 and brought me back in the fold.
The only thing that's bad is all the minifigs are in bad condition because of the playtime.
Can't wait what Huwbot will show us tomorrow.

I had this set and loved it as a kid. I wonder if it still at my parent’s place.

Love it. My brother got it for his birthday as a kid. We mixed all our sets anyway, and now everything is with me. The set wasn't exactly cheap at the time, something like a hundred guilders.

I shall pay a kings ransom!

1 on my most wanted list!

@gorf43 said:
"Imagine this set with todays pieces and colors! Even I as a casual observer of castle couldnt help but pick that up. "
Maybe something like a modified 31120: https://brickset.com/article/59997/makeover-31120-medieval-castle

This set is 11 years older than I am. It is, to this day, my best Bricklink purchase. It sits proudly on my shelf, opposite the smaller black falcons castle, 6074, another amazing castle.
So while I didn't experience this as a child, they are still awesome :)

Off topic, sorry, but I couldn't find mention of it anywhere else.
Has anybody viewing Brickset on a mobile device noticed any change in layout since yesterday?

For me, about since late yesterday morning the layout has changed from mobile-optimized to standard desktop layout, meaning everything is much smaller and the texts are tiny because of the boxes on the right being always in view, meaning the rest of the page is automatically adjusted to fit horizontally.
This makes using the site very hard on my mobile phone.

@Huw: Have there been any changes to the site, or could this be a problem of my (Chrome) browser on my phone?

Sorry for the interruption and now back to the discussion about this awesome Castle set.

@AustinPowers, Mobile device (Safari) and no change. Everything is and has been mobile optimised.

@AustinPowers iOS/Chrome here, no problem. The site is in the mobile layout

I'm going absolutely misty eyed at this. I adored this set and would modify it endlessly to make alternative looks and functions. Even though I was a complete space-nerd, this and the later Forest Men sets just captivated me in way few other ranges did. I have Medieval Blacksmith waiting to be built when I have free time and space to display it and I can't wait for a little blast of nostalgia!!

@MCLegoboy:
If it was rereleased today, (a limited number of nostalgic AFOL) people would absolutely freak out and line up (two or three deep at each store) to buy multiple copies. If it was released as a new set, they’d whinge about how all they give us is this Creator 3-in-1 garbage and that we need a castle on par with the new Ideas Blacksmith.

I still have the manual for this set. I miss my old Castle collection.

@vzarmo said:
" @Sammael said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
"12 Minifigs, 4 horses, 674 pieces (a number are big panel things, but still) that form a fully formed castle, and it only cost around $50. People would weep over a set to be released like this today. I'm sure in a way, it's very bare bones, but still, this looks incredible. One question though, where is the king?"

$52.75 in 1984 is $141.32 in today's money. Can you imagine the ourage if a 674-piece set were to cost that much today?"

Can you imagine a set with 12 minifigs for this price today?
I would happily buy a castle for 140$ if it has only 670 pieces, but 12 figures in castle theme.
"

There are plenty of city sets with so many minifigs, 60292 has ~800 pieces and 10 figs for $100.

TLG simply doesn't think Castle sells (we all disagree but they apparently have the market stats), but if they were to issue a new castle series I'm sure they could create a set with as many figs. It would probably add about $30 to the set cost (so... $100 for a decent sized castle would be $130 with those figs).

I think the problem is we think we would buy new Castle sets because we have fond memories of the old Castle sets. But in reality the new sets would have a completely different design language, they wouldn't be as simplistic and universal as before. They would have plenty of little detailing pieces that raise price without increasing volume and the minifigs would have these obscene, overly expressive faces which may not be a problem for everyone, but it certainly is a problem for me (being an introvert I don't like excessive and unnecessary expressions).

That being said, I'd like to see them try and prove me wrong.

@Sammael said:
"There are plenty of city sets with so many minifigs, 60292 has ~800 pieces and 10 figs for $100.

TLG simply doesn't think Castle sells (we all disagree but they apparently have the market stats), but if they were to issue a new castle series I'm sure they could create a set with as many figs. It would probably add about $30 to the set cost (so... $100 for a decent sized castle would be $130 with those figs)."

But apart from City they don't really put that many minifigs in any other series?
$100 Creator set has 4 figures. $160 Star Wars set also has 4 figures. There were 6 in hidden side sets for $100 and $130.

@LordDunsany said:
"This castle opens up to form a wall and allow expansion with other sets with wall sections, but the castle itself unfortunately sits on a thinner baseplate than most other wall sets. This castle's design is used as the general template for many subsequent large LEGO castles so the set itself may appear a bit plain at first glance, though a closer look reveals some unique features such as the crossed lances used as decor above the brick-built portcullis, columns with alternating color or shape bricks, brick-built stairs to the ramparts, and a barred door to the prison. This large set contains 4 four mounted knights, 4 archers, and 4 soldiers/guards - a veritable army-builder! Interestingly, the bricks and plates used to fill in the gap in horses without a saddle are shown being repurposed as a small step/stair to assist knights in mounting their steeds."

I've always wanted to see all the different sets stuck together as they were meant to be.

@ahughwilliams said:
" @LordDunsany said:
"This castle opens up to form a wall and allow expansion with other sets with wall sections, but the castle itself unfortunately sits on a thinner baseplate than most other wall sets. This castle's design is used as the general template for many subsequent large LEGO castles so the set itself may appear a bit plain at first glance, though a closer look reveals some unique features such as the crossed lances used as decor above the brick-built portcullis, columns with alternating color or shape bricks, brick-built stairs to the ramparts, and a barred door to the prison. This large set contains 4 four mounted knights, 4 archers, and 4 soldiers/guards - a veritable army-builder! Interestingly, the bricks and plates used to fill in the gap in horses without a saddle are shown being repurposed as a small step/stair to assist knights in mounting their steeds."

I've always wanted to see all the different sets stuck together as they were meant to be. "

Something like this: http://legosteveblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/lego-black-falcon-sets-1984-1992.html perhaps? (scroll down for a picture with several sets)

this was my white whale when I was a kid, but my first castle I think was King's Mountain Fortress. I had some smaller castle sets in the 80's but at the time I was more of a Space fan.

Is there really any point to a drawbridge if there's no moat for it to cross? I guess it's so they have more than just the portcullis.

@ferda said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
"12 Minifigs, 4 horses, 674 pieces (a number are big panel things, but still) that form a fully formed castle, and it only cost around $50. People would weep over a set to be released like this today...."

As per inflationtool.com or officialdata.org: $53 in 1984 is roughly worth of $135 in 2021. Now I did spend approx. 2 minutes trying to find some corresponding set with a similar number of pieces and complexity - and there are probably better examples - but this is what I have found:
60292 Town Centre $100 (789 pieces)
60302 Wildlife Rescue Operation $90 (523 pieces)
Long story short, based on these two sets I guess that 6080 King's Castle (674 pieces) would cost today about $90-$100. Not $135 as a pure inflation rate of 1984-2021 suggests.
The conclusion is: The LEGO got actually CHEAPER! So stop whining ;-)"

You forgot the 12 minifigures and the 4 horses.
You can't look only on the number of pieces, so not, the LEGO actually is not cheaper and is very parsimonious on the number of minifigures in their set, look at the: 31120

Oh, the memories. As a eight year old boy this was my favourite toy. I still have the manual and most of the pieces.
Quite possibly the greatest set ever!!

@icey said:
"Doesn't this depict a stereotypical version of white Europeans?"

How so?

Wow, Huwbot picked a stone cold classic today.

Gladly rebuilt early in the lockdown last year. Although couldn't locate either of the two 22x16 green baseplates, but somehow had 24x16's, which worked just fine. The parts are so simple they were pretty easy to track down, although tracking down and correcting those 12 Minifigures and appropriate accessories was the time consuming part. I remember this and 6074 sitting atop my dresser (the mountain peak in my imaginary kingdom) locked in perpetual conflict. Good times!

@icey said:
"Doesn't this depict a stereotypical version of white Europeans?"

? sorry i dont' understand.
Do you say that the castles are racist because in the middle age in Europe the large majority of people was white?

@Gabriel_Voyager said:
"You forgot the 12 minifigures and the 4 horses.
You can't look only on the number of pieces, so not, the LEGO actually is not cheaper and is very parsimonious on the number of minifigures in their set, look at the: 31120 "

Actually, you are wrong. Just look here: https://therealityprose.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/what_happened_with_lego/
(also referenced from https://brickset.com/article/5545/is-lego-getting-more-expensive )

And btw. 60292 Town Centre has 10 minifigs, not very different from 12 in 6080 . Also, as you say you can't just look at piece numbers, you also can't exactly compare 3-in-1 theme set (which regularly do not have many minifigs) with a castle set (which should be compared with a city theme).

And I'm glad you mentioned 31120 Medieval Castle - true it has only 3 minifigs - it is a 3-in-1 set (not counting the skeleton guy) - but did you notice it has 1426 pieces for $100? That's A LOT MORE than 674 in 6080 . Nope, LEGO is definitely not more expensive.

@ferda said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
"12 Minifigs, 4 horses, 674 pieces (a number are big panel things, but still) that form a fully formed castle, and it only cost around $50. People would weep over a set to be released like this today...."

As per inflationtool.com or officialdata.org: $53 in 1984 is roughly worth of $135 in 2021. Now I did spend approx. 2 minutes trying to find some corresponding set with a similar number of pieces and complexity - and there are probably better examples - but this is what I have found:
60292 Town Centre $100 (789 pieces)
60302 Wildlife Rescue Operation $90 (523 pieces)
Long story short, based on these two sets I guess that 6080 King's Castle (674 pieces) would cost today about $90-$100. Not $135 as a pure inflation rate of 1984-2021 suggests.
The conclusion is: The LEGO got actually CHEAPER! So stop whining ;-)"

I’ve never understood why people say, ‘this set has X amount of pieces’ and imply value based on ‘piece count’.

A set could have 5,000 pieces but it doesn’t really mean anything if half of them are individual studs, single slopes and DOTS (as most modern sets are).

@LordDunsany said:
"Stereotypical yes, but it is a presentation of white Europeans created by white Europeans (who are thus in charge of the narrative) and therein lies the difference."

Or maybe simply bacause in the middle age in Europe the majority of the people was white?
so yes the castles in Europe was created by white Europeans.... very strange right?

@ferda said:
Yes but the type of pieces has also changed. Most modern sets often contain many more (often small) pieces for detailing compared to older sets so while you may be getting more overall pieces, you often feel like you are making less!

I think a key perception is the fact that the older large Castle sets contained a large number of minifigs of the same faction - one essentially had an entire army with the set alone! Even when newer large Castle sets had large numbers of minifigs (and they often didn't as 70404 shows), the numbers were almost always divided among at least 2 different factions, thus leading to less impressive "army-building"

@thefirst said:
"A set could have 5,000 pieces but it doesn’t really mean anything if half of them are individual studs, single slopes and DOTS (as most modern sets are)."
Absolutely. Look at the World Map set with over 10,000 pieces. The vast majority of those are 1x1 round plates/tiles that individually are worth next to nothing. Many modern sets contain lots of such tiny 1x1 pieces, whereas in the Eighties hardly any of such tiny greebling pieces were used. Hence old sets often make for huge builds with very few pieces.
I don't think one can say that LEGO has gotten cheaper, quite the opposite imho.

@Gabriel_Voyager said:
" @LordDunsany said:
"Stereotypical yes, but it is a presentation of white Europeans created by white Europeans (who are thus in charge of the narrative) and therein lies the difference."

Or maybe simply bacause in the middle age in Europe the majority of the people was white?
so yes the castles in Europe was created by white Europeans.... very strange right?"

I am referring to the discussion for the RSOD from 2 days ago (6766). I was just contrasting the stereotyping in this set with that in 6766 to illustrate why one generated far more heated discussion than the other.

@LordDunsany said:
" @Gabriel_Voyager said:
" @LordDunsany said:
"Stereotypical yes, but it is a presentation of white Europeans created by white Europeans (who are thus in charge of the narrative) and therein lies the difference."

Or maybe simply bacause in the middle age in Europe the majority of the people was white?
so yes the castles in Europe was created by white Europeans.... very strange right?"

I am referring to the discussion for the RSOD from 2 days ago (6766). I was just contrasting the stereotyping in this set with that in 6766 to illustrate why one generated far more heated discussion than the other."

Sorry but i think that we can't compare the history of the native americans pre-Columbian and the history of the middle age in europe.
In this set i don't see any stereotyping, but as european i can have a partial vision.

My favourite castles come from raised baseplates era (6090, 6086 and 6082 are my top 3), but I like this one - it's closed construction, it has very decent gate, and a LOT of minifigures. Modern 7946 and 70404 are very much inspired by this old style classic castle :)

The king is in another castle :P

$52 may look good on paper, but adjusted for inflation, this would be $134 in today's money. So in theory, it was actually more expensive than modern sets with similar piece count.

1984 was the year my dark ages started but I remember looking at this at the time and being fascinated by all of the grey - grey was only found in space at that time (and the only time I ever got a space set was for grey!) - I certainly considered getting this set for that reason alone and as it would not have been played with, just put it away...

@LordDunsany:
An odd trick you can use is to build the plated wall sections on baseplates (i.e. actually attach their plate bases to a regular baseplate) and then perch this on top of another baseplate. The same trick would work by adding a layer of plates or bricks below everything. A baseplate sitting on a layer of studs will actually sit nearly flush with a plate attached to the same layer of studs.

@Norikins:
I don’t think they were “planning decades ahead” so much as having so few themes to deal with back then that they could lean over and grab a completely untouched range of numbers if they decided they wanted to have a certain subgroup of sets be easy to identify from set numbers alone. The downside to this practice is it left a lot of orphaned set numbers that ended up being assigned willy-nilly years later just to use them up, because nobody had really planned things out decades in advance. Or if they did, plans changed two weeks later without them being notified.

You’d also be surprised how many other industries had similar limitations. The first wave of 3-3/4” GI Joe action figures was so deco-intensive that they had to agree to release one figure per case that had no deco applied (hence the solid black original Snake Eyes). Batman: The Animated Series had a limit on how many different colors they were allowed to animate with (though, like LEGO set designers, they got to define their own color palette, and even chose to animate over black backgrounds for related reasons). Their character designs proved to be so idealized for print that, combined with their 6-day-a-week release schedule, animation studios had a hard time keeping up, and they ended up farming episodes out to maybe a few dozen different companies (and the studio that animated Emmy-winning episode “Heart of Ice” is believed to have gone under as a result of how much work they put into animating that single episode, down to hand-airbrushing frost onto Mr Freeze’ bubble dome on every frame where he appears).

@Brickalili:
As I recall, Yellow Castle has four knights, four squires (how often have they done that), and eight foot soldiers.

@T79:
That’s...ah...a defensive measure! Yeah. They’ve clearly seen how many Hollywood movies feature castle infiltration by way of hiding in a cart, wagon, or flaming wheelbarrow.

@icey:
Yellow?

@AustinPowers:
Maybe you bumped a link to request the desktop version?

This (I think) was my first ever set, or certainly the first I remember getting. My mother collected vouchers from the Weetabix cereal in the UK that either covered the entire cost of the set, or part of it. I came down on my birthday to find this bright yellow box waiting for me. Amazing !!

Having saved a bit of money not doing anything or going anywhere in the first UK lockdown, I actually purchased this set again last year. Sadly my original set was sold (by me!) to fund a skateboard and later an Amiga 500!!

Happy now I have it back, including box and it has pride of place on one of my many Lego laden shelves.

Oh man, my first castle, and one of my favorite set as a kid... subsequent castle sets became donors of replacement torsos, shields, and weapons... I remember touring the shops to find remaining Lion Knight boxes when they went OOP. Then internet happened.

@thefirst said:
"I’ve never understood why people say, ‘this set has X amount of pieces’ and imply value based on ‘piece count’.

A set could have 5,000 pieces but it doesn’t really mean anything if half of them are individual studs, single slopes and DOTS (as most modern sets are)."

So do you want to compare by weight? If you do that, you will find out that you don't get that much with 6080 as you do with modern sets:
6080 (Castle) - 950g - 627pcs - 12 minifigs - $135 in today's money
31120 (3in1) - 2272g - 1408pcs - 3 minifigs - $100
60292 (City) - 1729g - 750pcs - 10 minifigs - $100

Simply said, old and new sets are different, but then a lot of things was different in 1984 - for example we were 37 years younger(!) ... when you look at the numbers, you simply can't deny that LEGO is AT LEAST approx. staying at the same price level. Yes, sets today tend to have more smaller pieces, sometimes a lot less minifigs, sometimes similar number of minifigs, but the physical dimensions are more or less the same, sets are more colorful, more detailed. I think it's your nostalgia, sets are are still comparable and absolutely UNDER the inflation line.

What a wonderful castle.

The greatest thing about it is that it is actually modular and can be combined with other awesome sets, like 6040, 6041, 6061 and 6067.

So many things to be missed these times...

Meh

@ferda:
Welcome to my world! I’ve been on that crusade since people started complaining about the high prices of SW sets sometime between 1999-2004. And, like the real Crusades, I haven’t had much luck. At the time I did the math, SW sets (excluding obvious outliers) cost $0.09/pc, while the World City sets that everyone held up as proof that there was a “SW tax” actually cost $0.11/pc. Sets from this era in the US usually ran around $0.10/pc, and that 40 year stretch is why that is so ingrained in AFOL culture as the gold standard for prices. Except when people don’t feel like doing math, at which point everything is “too expensive”.

@AustinPowers:
Funny thing is, secondary market part-out value has very little to do with the cost to manufacture the parts in the first place. What some Bricklink seller can manage to sell the individual components for, therefore, has absolutely no bearing on how the MSRP should be calculated. Mold cycle time and labor to pack don’t change much based on the size of the part. Material costs for ABS parts are negligible. The only major price break you should expect is for mass volumes of individual elements.

An amazing set. One of the greats. I wonder if I have the parts to build it.

This should be a reissue. …would probably need to be $80 though.

@Gabriel_Voyager said:

I am not seriously claiming that there is stereotyping in this current set; I am trying to explain the reasons for potential offense concerning 6766 compared to 6080.
There were some (mostly satirical) earlier comments about mock offense being taken about "stereotyping" in the current set as a reflection of the discussions concerning 6766 two days ago. I was pointing out the inherent differences in power dynamics and historical narrative (i.e., Europeans "stereotyping" medieval Europeans vs Europeans stereotyping Native Americans). I understand that not all white people are the same but the dominant historical narrative in Western thought has mostly been driven by people of Western/Central European descent; thus some do not consider their stereotypes of historically more marginalized communities to be socially acceptable anymore. Since these people are thus trying to change a former social "norm" (in their view), they tend to be a bit zealous in calling out others, which often leads to reactionary backlashes.

@Brickalili said:
"Genuinely impressed by just how many minifigs come with this set. Do any other big castles even get close to actually feeling properly garrisoned like this one?"

375 of course!

So, today as an adult I think this is a great set. Looks great, like a real castle. Lot of playability.

But when i got it as a kid, on Christmas of all times, I was so disappointed. Those large grey pieces suck! I can't do something else with them. And so it is. I haven't been able to use them for shit.

It was my last big Town-related set. A few smaller ones, but then i transitioned to Technic.

I really think bricks are the thing with LEGO. Panels are bad.

It's a good set, as a castle. But it's lacking in LEGOing (building other things)

@LordDunsany , @Prof_Physika

Of course, the most vocal people preaching about how Europeans don't have the right to culturally identify themselves are... Americans.
No offense, but your country's short history has nothing remotely comparable to Europeans' 2000 years of nuanced relations, wars, alliances, traditions. You don't know what cultural identity and historical heritage means, yet you try to shove your "white guilt" onto us, as if we were responsible for everything bad that happened to Native Americans or otherwise.
I encourage you to read the history of my country, and after you do so tell me that after 123 years of annexation with no industrial advancement, 2 World Wars that ravaged our population, 44 years of communist occupation, living in a developing 2nd world country I am somehow "privileged" or "in a position of power" just because I'm white.

This set is amazing

@Arnoldos said:
" @LordDunsany , @Prof_Physika

Of course, the most vocal people preaching about how Europeans don't have the right to culturally identify themselves are... Americans.
No offense, but your country's short history has nothing remotely comparable to Europeans' 2000 years of nuanced relations, wars, alliances, traditions. You don't know what cultural identity and historical heritage means, yet you try to shove your "white guilt" onto us, as if we were responsible for everything bad that happened to Native Americans or otherwise.
I encourage you to read the history of my country, and after you do so tell me that after 123 years of annexation with no industrial advancement, 2 World Wars that ravaged our population, 44 years of communist occupation, living in a developing 2nd world country I am somehow "privileged" or "in a position of power" just because I'm white."

I literally never said anything you’re alleging. You’re arguing against a straw man.

@Prof_Physika said:
" @Arnoldos said:
" @LordDunsany , @Prof_Physika

Of course, the most vocal people preaching about how Europeans don't have the right to culturally identify themselves are... Americans.
No offense, but your country's short history has nothing remotely comparable to Europeans' 2000 years of nuanced relations, wars, alliances, traditions. You don't know what cultural identity and historical heritage means, yet you try to shove your "white guilt" onto us, as if we were responsible for everything bad that happened to Native Americans or otherwise.
I encourage you to read the history of my country, and after you do so tell me that after 123 years of annexation with no industrial advancement, 2 World Wars that ravaged our population, 44 years of communist occupation, living in a developing 2nd world country I am somehow "privileged" or "in a position of power" just because I'm white."

I literally never said anything you’re alleging. You’re arguing against a straw man."

Yes, because you conveniently assume that only the successful Western Europeans are Europeans.

Horses and figures are the main thing missing from the 3-in-1 Castle right now, so hoping for those type of sets soon.

@ferda said:
" @Gabriel_Voyager said:
"You forgot the 12 minifigures and the 4 horses.
You can't look only on the number of pieces, so not, the LEGO actually is not cheaper and is very parsimonious on the number of minifigures in their set, look at the: 31120 "

Actually, you are wrong. Just look here: https://therealityprose.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/what_happened_with_lego/
(also referenced from https://brickset.com/article/5545/is-lego-getting-more-expensive )

And btw. 60292 Town Centre has 10 minifigs, not very different from 12 in 6080 . Also, as you say you can't just look at piece numbers, you also can't exactly compare 3-in-1 theme set (which regularly do not have many minifigs) with a castle set (which should be compared with a city theme).

And I'm glad you mentioned 31120 Medieval Castle - true it has only 3 minifigs - it is a 3-in-1 set (not counting the skeleton guy) - but did you notice it has 1426 pieces for $100? That's A LOT MORE than 674 in 6080 . Nope, LEGO is definitely not more expensive."

I agree that from the numbers it seems that Lego is not getting more expensive or even cheaper. But TLG instead of giving us a whole castle with 700 pieces for $50 makes a 1400 pieces set for $100. In the end we pay the same amount, perhaps a little less because of the inflation.

I find the linked analyses a bit flawed:
- Licensed sets are not more expensive that non licensed sets - the chart gives us a difference of about $0.01 per piece. It is still almost 10% difference. If you look at specific examples the differences becomes bigger - 1400 pcs: Star Wars $160, Creator $100, Hidden Side $130. Probably some unlicensed sets with specialized parts or power functions bring up the overall price per piece.
- The average weight of a LEGO set - this takes into account data from brickset which doesn't distinguish between set weight, the instruction and the box. Bricklink has the data and old instructions were 5x lighter (though some boxes were much heavier). Still, even if the weight has increased along with the price, the heavier sets tend to have the same amount of volume. More small pieces creates a denser model and price per gram seem to go down. But at this point one would have to analyse volume and in some cases perception of volume and it gets impossible to get objective results.

@Arnoldos said:

No one is arguing about how Europeans don't have a right to culturally identify themselves; merely that this is not the same as Europeans making stereotypes about Native Americans.

@Sammael said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
"12 Minifigs, 4 horses, 674 pieces (a number are big panel things, but still) that form a fully formed castle, and it only cost around $50. People would weep over a set to be released like this today. I'm sure in a way, it's very bare bones, but still, this looks incredible. One question though, where is the king?"

$52.75 in 1984 is $141.32 in today's money. Can you imagine the ourage if a 674-piece set were to cost that much today?"

Lego did just that recently. Entering set 60307 Wildlife Rescue Camp. The set has
a meagre 503 interlocking pieces and retails for CAD$139.99. It has 6 minifigs (none special imho) and 8 animals (male elephant, male lion, female lion, 2 lion cubs, 1 African eagle and 2 monkeys). And I bought it along with all the sets of the range because I like Lego animals!

I don't want to open a can of worms but what is so wrong with 31120? The only thing I don't like with it is the lack of animals (not a fan of brick built animals - I know, many people prefer them). You have to wonder if Lego is measuring the interest of this set (31120) before committing to a 'real' castle set?

Castle and Pirates always had nice sets back them. I, however was a Classic Space guy and by 1984 I had migrated to Expert Builders (now Technic). Still hoping for a Classic Space set for Lego 90s anniversary. If they were smarts, they would do one for each theme (Space, Castle, Pirate, Adventurer, Trains) - dream big! Isn't it what they say?

@Prof_Physika said:
"Everything is political because nothing exists or was created in a vacuum…"
The state of existence, the act of creation, or the connection of either of those things to anything else does not define whether something is political in the sense of having the power to control people through force or influence. All things that are political exist, are created and do so in a context but it’s a fallacy to conclude that that subset defines the whole.

You can experience that when you travel, particularly internationally. I have lived in the UK (where I currently reside), the US and the Far East. Issues that are politically salient in one country or region may have little or no salience in another. And of all the places I have been to (which far outnumbers where I have lived), nowhere is as political as the US. Politics pervades many aspects of everyday life there where it doesn’t elsewhere. If one is steeped in that social setting, it is likely difficult to imagine one where that isn’t true.

@lukaszsw said:
"- The average weight of a LEGO set…"
French LEGO influencer Dimitri (Brickmitri) usually uses the weight of a set (excluding instructions and packaging) per euro as an indicator of worth. It may not be a perfect method (some parts are exceptionally heavy for various reasons while others, such as cloth pieces, are very light), but works better on the whole as a value metric than ppp.

This was my FIRST set ever!!

@Prof_Physika:
Funny thing is, you hear people say things aren’t political all the time, right before they demand a law be passed about that very same thing. If it’s been legislated, it’s absolutely political.

@Zander:
I wholeheartedly disagree. If you give me a $20 set that’s all 2x4 bricks, and a $20 set that’s half the weight in just cheese wedges, I’ll take the latter in a hot second. Small parts are so much more useful than bulk filler in my MOCs.