As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

LEGO thread!

24567100

Posts

  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Oh, and I tend to hate the Star Wars type stuff. I tended to use the box models as an exercise in learning to use the new pieces, I never really kept them like that for more than a day. I could always build more impressive stuff. I understand the commercial necessity (or at least the argument for it), but it's totally wasted on me. I guess I'm just a different sort of LEGO guy than some others.

    I think the Star Wars stuff comes with some cool pieces. Especially minifigs. Cool minifigs drive my purchases more often than I'd like to admit... but that reminds me specifically why I bought the set with the Tauntaun. I think I have a project for this weekend.

    I do really miss the box backs that showed alternate models. I used to have a lot of fun trying to figure out how they built them.

    And speaking of minifigs, these are coming out this year:

    4295476289_52e5914b62.jpg

    $2 for a random one of these... more info

    Tomanta on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Oh, and I tend to hate the Star Wars type stuff. I tended to use the box models as an exercise in learning to use the new pieces, I never really kept them like that for more than a day. I could always build more impressive stuff. I understand the commercial necessity (or at least the argument for it), but it's totally wasted on me. I guess I'm just a different sort of LEGO guy than some others.

    No I totally understand. Personally, I enjoy my favorite franchises being "LEGO-ized", because having interesting looking minifigures reminds me of things like Kubricks, which I enjoy.

    That being said, I generally buy sets which have parts that I like on them that I plan to use as I don't live near a LEGO store, and I don't know what I need until I start building, which makes it hard to bulk-order bricks online. I have only bought a few officially licensed sets, and like I said, I bought them for specific pieces. However, I also LOVE the aesthetic of the Minifig, and as such loved LEGO batman, Indiana Jones, and Star Wars (and can't wait for Prince of Persia).

    LEGO Toy Story (their new venture) is kind of disappointing in that they really didn't try to make the characters (Woody, Buzz, etc) look like Minifigs, they just kind of shrunk them. (Compare it to the ewoks, chewie, and other alien species in the star wars line)
    Lately the space police and Atlantis sets are catching my eye because the minifigs are amazing.

    There is a Cthulu minifig in this set

    I am also REALLY impressed with the revamp of the Castle line, as I said before. The Dwarves Mine, Medieval Marketplace, and the Troll's Mountain fort are some of the most impressive sets I have ever seen commercially.

    Arch on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Also tomanta I was JUST about to post that!

    Arch on
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I admit, I can appreciate the minifig aspect quite a bit. Not much else though. Big models just never appealed to me. I mean, the Star Destroyer looks cool and all, but unless it severely augments my ability to build something even better, I'm just not that interested. Things like the Falling Water set pictured above look nice, but it's not a set I'd be remotely interested in if there were a similarly-priced set with actually interesting pieces.

    To put it in Magic terms, I'm the LEGO equivalent of a Johnny. There may be a LEGO aficionado term for me that I am not aware of, but I never picked up on that culture's jargon.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Oh, and I tend to hate the Star Wars type stuff. I tended to use the box models as an exercise in learning to use the new pieces, I never really kept them like that for more than a day. I could always build more impressive stuff. I understand the commercial necessity (or at least the argument for it), but it's totally wasted on me. I guess I'm just a different sort of LEGO guy than some others.

    No I totally understand. Personally, I enjoy my favorite franchises being "LEGO-ized", because having interesting looking minifigures reminds me of things like Kubricks, which I enjoy.

    That being said, I generally buy sets which have parts that I like on them that I plan to use as I don't live near a LEGO store, and I don't know what I need until I start building, which makes it hard to bulk-order bricks online. I have only bought a few officially licensed sets, and like I said, I bought them for specific pieces. However, I also LOVE the aesthetic of the Minifig, and as such loved LEGO batman, Indiana Jones, and Star Wars (and can't wait for Prince of Persia).

    LEGO Toy Story (their new venture) is kind of disappointing in that they really didn't try to make the characters (Woody, Buzz, etc) look like Minifigs, they just kind of shrunk them. (Compare it to the ewoks, chewie, and other alien species in the star wars line)
    Lately the space police and Atlantis sets are catching my eye because the minifigs are amazing.

    There is a Cthulu minifig in this set

    I am also REALLY impressed with the revamp of the Castle line, as I said before. The Dwarves Mine, Medieval Marketplace, and the Troll's Mountain fort are some of the most impressive sets I have ever seen commercially.

    I love all things Cthulhu, but I don't really get the construction possibilities around a minifig version.

    EDIT: Nevermind. Awesome, epic gothic shit would be cool to build around such a figure.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I admit, I can appreciate the minifig aspect quite a bit. Not much else though. Big models just never appealed to me. I mean, the Star Destroyer looks cool and all, but unless it severely augments my ability to build something even better, I'm just not that interested. Things like the Falling Water set pictured above look nice, but it's not a set I'd be remotely interested in if there were a similarly-priced set with actually interesting pieces.

    To put it in Magic terms, I'm the LEGO equivalent of a Johnny. There may be a LEGO aficionado term for me that I am not aware of, but I never picked up on that culture's jargon.

    I am a Johnny as well (in both Magic and LEGO and most other things...even things like WoW)...and I don't know that there is a 'word' in LEGO jargon because it is unfathomably stupid (see the OP).

    I think you and I are saying the same thing...for me I would buy that star destroyer to put it together, learn how they did some of the building, then tear it down and use the pieces.

    But I would only buy a set if there is an interesting piece or they used an interesting technique, which is why a lot of sets get a pass from me these days.

    For instance, I am really impressed with this new set. Like I said, I really don't like what they did with the other characters in the Toy Story line, but this one is actually amazing.

    Arch on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Oh, and I tend to hate the Star Wars type stuff. I tended to use the box models as an exercise in learning to use the new pieces, I never really kept them like that for more than a day. I could always build more impressive stuff. I understand the commercial necessity (or at least the argument for it), but it's totally wasted on me. I guess I'm just a different sort of LEGO guy than some others.

    No I totally understand. Personally, I enjoy my favorite franchises being "LEGO-ized", because having interesting looking minifigures reminds me of things like Kubricks, which I enjoy.

    That being said, I generally buy sets which have parts that I like on them that I plan to use as I don't live near a LEGO store, and I don't know what I need until I start building, which makes it hard to bulk-order bricks online. I have only bought a few officially licensed sets, and like I said, I bought them for specific pieces. However, I also LOVE the aesthetic of the Minifig, and as such loved LEGO batman, Indiana Jones, and Star Wars (and can't wait for Prince of Persia).

    LEGO Toy Story (their new venture) is kind of disappointing in that they really didn't try to make the characters (Woody, Buzz, etc) look like Minifigs, they just kind of shrunk them. (Compare it to the ewoks, chewie, and other alien species in the star wars line)
    Lately the space police and Atlantis sets are catching my eye because the minifigs are amazing.

    There is a Cthulu minifig in this set

    I am also REALLY impressed with the revamp of the Castle line, as I said before. The Dwarves Mine, Medieval Marketplace, and the Troll's Mountain fort are some of the most impressive sets I have ever seen commercially.

    I love all things Cthulhu, but I don't really get the construction possibilities around a minifig version.

    EDIT: Nevermind. Awesome, epic gothic shit would be cool to build around such a figure.

    I almost, almost dropped the 40 bucks (I think?) for it yesterday...I actually drew out a diorama and planned how to build some non-euclidean cyclopean (? fuck you lovecraft :lol:) columns and an ominous gateway around that figure sacrificing a girl to Cthulu

    I still may buy it and do that

    Arch on
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Non-Euclidean?

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • WMain00WMain00 Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Guys! Guys! I just had a thought!!

    Dungeon's and Dragons lego games!!!!


    :D :O :D

    WMain00 on
  • NostregarNostregar Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Re-discovering that digital LEGO set maker has inspired me. When I get back from class I'm going to begin work on trying to replicate some of the Mechwarrior mechs in LEGO form.

    Nostregar on
    Nostregar wrote: »
    I think that an entire religious debate done in haiku would be genuinely enjoyable.
    You say there is God
    I see only the fleshmeat
    Prove your space daddy
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Non-Euclidean?

    IIRC in Call of Cthulu Lovecraft says something along the lines of "vast cyclopean columns with non-euclidean geometry"

    I have no idea what it means

    Lovecraft is insane

    Arch on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    WMain00 wrote: »
    Guys! Guys! I just had a thought!!

    Dungeon's and Dragons lego games!!!!


    :D :O :D

    I have had this exact thought and it would be soooooo good

    Arch on
  • WMain00WMain00 Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    WMain00 wrote: »
    Guys! Guys! I just had a thought!!

    Dungeon's and Dragons lego games!!!!


    :D :O :D

    I have had this exact thought and it would be soooooo good

    Get the lego creator opened! We need to invent dungeons and small villages that can all be opened up, and minature guys!

    WMain00 on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    WMain00 wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    WMain00 wrote: »
    Guys! Guys! I just had a thought!!

    Dungeon's and Dragons lego games!!!!


    :D :O :D

    I have had this exact thought and it would be soooooo good

    Get the lego creator opened! We need to invent dungeons and small villages that can all be opened up, and minature guys!

    I will make two dungeons this weekend. One with real bricks and one on here.

    Arch on
  • Curly_BraceCurly_Brace Robot Girl Mimiga VillageRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »
    I remember my brother invented a war game that was basically Warhammer (from my cursory understanding of Warhammer rules), where you'd pick your army and their equipment and then have movement based on the studs and have them fight. It was pretty cool but so involved that we only ended up playing it once (he won).

    You mean... BRIK WARS?

    EDIT: I will soon have over 40 pounds of LEGO in my possession, with which I am going to construct miniature sets for my D&D games.

    Curly_Brace on
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    I admit, I can appreciate the minifig aspect quite a bit. Not much else though. Big models just never appealed to me. I mean, the Star Destroyer looks cool and all, but unless it severely augments my ability to build something even better, I'm just not that interested. Things like the Falling Water set pictured above look nice, but it's not a set I'd be remotely interested in if there were a similarly-priced set with actually interesting pieces.

    To put it in Magic terms, I'm the LEGO equivalent of a Johnny. There may be a LEGO aficionado term for me that I am not aware of, but I never picked up on that culture's jargon.

    I am a Johnny as well (in both Magic and LEGO and most other things...even things like WoW)...and I don't know that there is a 'word' in LEGO jargon because it is unfathomably stupid (see the OP).

    I think you and I are saying the same thing...for me I would buy that star destroyer to put it together, learn how they did some of the building, then tear it down and use the pieces.

    But I would only buy a set if there is an interesting piece or they used an interesting technique, which is why a lot of sets get a pass from me these days.

    For instance, I am really impressed with this new set. Like I said, I really don't like what they did with the other characters in the Toy Story line, but this one is actually amazing.

    I can certainly appreciate the Star Destroyer in terns of the raw resources it would add to my collection. That's one other plus that LEGO has over Magic: Lots and lots of one kind of piece is no problem at all. A thousand Duresses, no matter how good the card is, is necessarily limited by the rules and practicality of deckbuilding. I just wonder if there's a significant price bump to the Star Destroyer because of the design and branding value added to the pieces.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »
    I remember my brother invented a war game that was basically Warhammer (from my cursory understanding of Warhammer rules), where you'd pick your army and their equipment and then have movement based on the studs and have them fight. It was pretty cool but so involved that we only ended up playing it once (he won).

    You mean... BRIK WARS?

    EDIT: I will soon have over 40 pounds of LEGO in my possession, with which I am going to construct miniature sets for my D&D games.

    Holy. CRAP!

    Curly where do you live I want to play your D&D games

    Arch on
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »
    I remember my brother invented a war game that was basically Warhammer (from my cursory understanding of Warhammer rules), where you'd pick your army and their equipment and then have movement based on the studs and have them fight. It was pretty cool but so involved that we only ended up playing it once (he won).

    You mean... BRIK WARS?

    Hmmm, looks pretty similar, yeah. Really it's a pretty obvious idea, I wonder why Lego hasn't tried it themselves.

    KalTorak on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    I admit, I can appreciate the minifig aspect quite a bit. Not much else though. Big models just never appealed to me. I mean, the Star Destroyer looks cool and all, but unless it severely augments my ability to build something even better, I'm just not that interested. Things like the Falling Water set pictured above look nice, but it's not a set I'd be remotely interested in if there were a similarly-priced set with actually interesting pieces.

    To put it in Magic terms, I'm the LEGO equivalent of a Johnny. There may be a LEGO aficionado term for me that I am not aware of, but I never picked up on that culture's jargon.

    I am a Johnny as well (in both Magic and LEGO and most other things...even things like WoW)...and I don't know that there is a 'word' in LEGO jargon because it is unfathomably stupid (see the OP).

    I think you and I are saying the same thing...for me I would buy that star destroyer to put it together, learn how they did some of the building, then tear it down and use the pieces.

    But I would only buy a set if there is an interesting piece or they used an interesting technique, which is why a lot of sets get a pass from me these days.

    For instance, I am really impressed with this new set. Like I said, I really don't like what they did with the other characters in the Toy Story line, but this one is actually amazing.

    I can certainly appreciate the Star Destroyer in terns of the raw resources it would add to my collection. That's one other plus that LEGO has over Magic: Lots and lots of one kind of piece is no problem at all. A thousand Duresses, no matter how good the card is, is necessarily limited by the rules and practicality of deckbuilding. I just wonder if there's a significant price bump to the Star Destroyer because of the design and branding value added to the pieces.

    On the main shop (meaning through LEGO itself) no there isn't.

    However, buying it from anywhere else (especially people who know LEGO)....yes. yes there is a HUGE bump for sets with a specific piece.

    however, there is also BrickLinks, which I haven't used yet, but have heard good things about. I think it is essentially CraigsList for LEGO bricks. Minus the sex. Hopefully.

    Arch on
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Non-Euclidean?

    IIRC in Call of Cthulu Lovecraft says something along the lines of "vast cyclopean columns with non-euclidean geometry"

    I have no idea what it means

    Lovecraft is insane

    Well, cyclopean just means really fucking big. Non-Euclidian... Maybe something mindbending, like being bigger on the inside than on the outside, or something like M.C. Escher's Waterfall?

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »
    KalTorak wrote: »
    I remember my brother invented a war game that was basically Warhammer (from my cursory understanding of Warhammer rules), where you'd pick your army and their equipment and then have movement based on the studs and have them fight. It was pretty cool but so involved that we only ended up playing it once (he won).

    You mean... BRIK WARS?

    Hmmm, looks pretty similar, yeah. Really it's a pretty obvious idea, I wonder why Lego hasn't tried it themselves.
    In fact, it stands in pretty direct opposition to many fundamental elements of the LEGO® philosophy, such as "Not Teaching Kids How Funny It Is to Set People on Fire."

    LEGO hates things that make war seem fun, but they are by and large subverting this themselves.

    Arch on
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    KalTorak wrote: »
    KalTorak wrote: »
    I remember my brother invented a war game that was basically Warhammer (from my cursory understanding of Warhammer rules), where you'd pick your army and their equipment and then have movement based on the studs and have them fight. It was pretty cool but so involved that we only ended up playing it once (he won).

    You mean... BRIK WARS?

    Hmmm, looks pretty similar, yeah. Really it's a pretty obvious idea, I wonder why Lego hasn't tried it themselves.
    In fact, it stands in pretty direct opposition to many fundamental elements of the LEGO® philosophy, such as "Not Teaching Kids How Funny It Is to Set People on Fire."

    LEGO hates things that make war seem fun, but they are by and large subverting this themselves.

    ...Seriously? I mean, I appreciate the sentiment, but they make little guys with smiley faces, dress them up in armor, and stick giant swords/axes/guns/lasers in their hands.

    KalTorak on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Non-Euclidean?

    IIRC in Call of Cthulu Lovecraft says something along the lines of "vast cyclopean columns with non-euclidean geometry"

    I have no idea what it means

    Lovecraft is insane

    Well, cyclopean just means really fucking big. Non-Euclidian... Maybe something mindbending, like being bigger on the inside than on the outside, or something like M.C. Escher's Waterfall?

    Yeah, I knew what cyclopean meant...google Lovecraft non-euclidean geometry

    Arch on
  • Curly_BraceCurly_Brace Robot Girl Mimiga VillageRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »

    You mean... BRIK WARS?

    Hmmm, looks pretty similar, yeah. Really it's a pretty obvious idea, I wonder why Lego hasn't tried it themselves.

    Probably because, despite making countless sets with guns and weapons, LEGO likes to present a non-violent image, and I can respect that. It's more about the creative process, not just about going "bang bang." That's more action figure territory.
    Arch wrote: »
    EDIT: I will soon have over 40 pounds of LEGO in my possession, with which I am going to construct miniature sets for my D&D games.

    Holy. CRAP!

    Curly where do you live I want to play your D&D games

    Ha ha thanks! (I live in Wisconsin, btw) I am certainly not the first to do this. Also this totally gives me an excuse to start buying LEGO again.

    Also, the nice part about LEGO minifigs is they are about the same size as the figures for Medium-Sized (i.e. Human) creatures.

    Curly_Brace on
  • Capt HowdyCapt Howdy Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    flasht_zoom.jsp?&company=ToysRUsGSI&config=defaultZoom&zoomwidth=500&zoomheight=558&sku=p6598272

    And

    flasht_zoom.jsp?&company=ToysRUsGSI&config=defaultZoom&zoomwidth=500&zoomheight=558&sku=p6594203

    Edit -

    flasht_zoom.jsp?&company=ToysRUsGSI&config=defaultZoom&zoomwidth=500&zoomheight=558&sku=p6427755

    Capt Howdy on
    Steam: kaylesolo1
    3DS: 1521-4165-5907
    PS3: KayleSolo
    Live: Kayle Solo
    WiiU: KayleSolo
  • BamaBama Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Non-Euclidean?

    IIRC in Call of Cthulu Lovecraft says something along the lines of "vast cyclopean columns with non-euclidean geometry"

    I have no idea what it means

    Lovecraft is insane

    Well, cyclopean just means really fucking big. Non-Euclidian... Maybe something mindbending, like being bigger on the inside than on the outside, or something like M.C. Escher's Waterfall?

    Yeah, I knew what cyclopean meant...google Lovecraft non-euclidean geometry
    in the most basic sense "non-euclidean" means a geometry in which for a line L and a point P not on L there is not exactly one line through P parallel to L.

    So I don't know what exactly Lovecraft meant. Maybe try to imagine standing in a giant structure where the vanishing point didn't seem to exist.

    Bama on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Did anyone ever buy two pirate ships, to make an extremely large pirate ship?

    mrt144 on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Bama wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Non-Euclidean?

    IIRC in Call of Cthulu Lovecraft says something along the lines of "vast cyclopean columns with non-euclidean geometry"

    I have no idea what it means

    Lovecraft is insane

    Well, cyclopean just means really fucking big. Non-Euclidian... Maybe something mindbending, like being bigger on the inside than on the outside, or something like M.C. Escher's Waterfall?

    Yeah, I knew what cyclopean meant...google Lovecraft non-euclidean geometry
    in the most basic sense "non-euclidean" means a geometry in which for a line L and a point P not on L there is not exactly one line through P parallel to L.

    So I don't know what exactly Lovecraft meant. Maybe try to imagine standing in a giant structure where the vanishing point didn't seem to exist.

    I assume that is what he meant. Wait are we really dissecting my throwaway joke?

    AhhhhhhhH!!!!

    39-grind-me-up.jpg

    Arch on
  • JustinSane07JustinSane07 __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2010
    That's not Johnny Depp!

    JustinSane07 on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    How many Legos have you swallowed?

    mrt144 on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    mrt144 wrote: »
    Did anyone ever buy two pirate ships, to make an extremely large pirate ship?

    I really need to have my mother send me the legos.

    Couscous on
  • Curly_BraceCurly_Brace Robot Girl Mimiga VillageRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Thank you Arch, for putting this thread back on track.

    Also, someone actually too their time to think about what we should call those funky little LEGO pieces.

    Curly_Brace on
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    mrt144 wrote: »
    How many Legos have you swallowed?

    Swallowing isn't the problem, it's stepping on them. Fuckers are hard and sharp.

    KalTorak on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Thank you Arch, for putting this thread back on track.

    Also, someone actually too their time to think about what we should call those funky little LEGO pieces.

    Oh my god yes

    Also I do what I can for this thread. It is now my baby.

    I am currently reading the BrikWars rules...I need more people in SC to play with me

    Arch on
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Thank you Arch, for putting this thread back on track.

    Also, someone actually too their time to think about what we should call those funky little LEGO pieces.

    There is a very well organized naming scheme for pieces. For the most part, anyway, although what I would call things and what the unofficial name is are sometimes very different (it's a wing, dammit, call it a WING so I can find it when I search!). Ahem.

    Anyway, Peeron is a great site for inventorying your pieces. Outside of some technic pieces I have all of my stuff on there. I think. Also nifty is that you can check your collection against any set and see if you can build it / what you are missing. (Plus instructions for anything over a few years old). Unfortunately, it can be slow.

    EDIT - Hey, a non-terrible totp! Also, since I finally got logged in at Peeron I checked and I have about 11000 pieces. Which are a pain to sort, especially since they WERE sorted before they went into storage and I picked up a dozen or so more sets, and now the way they were sorted has to be revised...

    Tomanta on
  • Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    My project the past summer was to catalog and organise all of my Lego at my parents house. Two calloused hands and two dozen bins later, I have what was once the "Lego room" somewhat cleaned up (though apparently my cousins' kids got into it all one evening, but better someone play with it than it stay on a shelf).

    Like Tomanta mentioned, I also used Peeron and it is a really useful resource.

    Apparently I have, at least, 14,896 parts and 246 minifigs.
    KalTorak wrote: »
    mrt144 wrote: »
    How many Legos have you swallowed?
    Swallowing isn't the problem, it's stepping on them. Fuckers are hard and sharp.
    Or worse - having them vacuumed up.

    More than once I remember my parents sucking something up with a telltale 'clicking' while running the vacuum and me being taken out to the backyard to help go through the dusty contents of a vacuum bag to find that 1x1 piece that had been left out on the floor.

    Andrew_Jay on
  • CorvusCorvus . VancouverRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    LEGOs are great, and probably the toy that best stands the test of time. My parents kept my brother and mine's legos, which are now enjoyed by my brother's kids. I don't think there are many toys from the early 80s that your average kid now would still think are awesome.

    Corvus on
    :so_raven:
  • Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Corvus wrote: »
    LEGOs are great, and probably the toy that best stands the test of time. My parents kept my brother and mine's legos, which are now enjoyed by my brother's kids. I don't think there are many toys from the early 80s that your average kid now would still think are awesome.
    That's a major strength. While there are new pieces, especially more specialised pieces, today, little has changed. I can look at a bin of pieces and there are no relevant differences between a brick from one of my first sets from 1985 and one from today (well, I haven't bought Lego since 2001 URL="http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/3451-1"]giant Sopwith Camel set[/URL). Very little, if any, of it is dated. Nor does it really wear out.

    Andrew_Jay on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Thank you Arch, for putting this thread back on track.

    Also, someone actually too their time to think about what we should call those funky little LEGO pieces.

    There is a very well organized naming scheme for pieces. For the most part, anyway, although what I would call things and what the unofficial name is are sometimes very different (it's a wing, dammit, call it a WING so I can find it when I search!). Ahem.

    Anyway, Peeron is a great site for inventorying your pieces. Outside of some technic pieces I have all of my stuff on there. I think. Also nifty is that you can check your collection against any set and see if you can build it / what you are missing. (Plus instructions for anything over a few years old). Unfortunately, it can be slow.

    EDIT - Hey, a non-terrible totp! Also, since I finally got logged in at Peeron I checked and I have about 11000 pieces. Which are a pain to sort, especially since they WERE sorted before they went into storage and I picked up a dozen or so more sets, and now the way they were sorted has to be revised...

    Hmmm...gonna check this site out

    damnit now I want to go through and re-organize my bricks. I have them sorted by color but I want to do size as well....

    I don't know if I have enough bins/space

    Arch on
  • KongoKongo Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I'm so happy to see a topic about this- although I'll probably spend more time lurking than posting. Aside from car and home, Lego is easily my life's largest investment (I'm 36 and have been getting Lego since the 70's- I still have all my original instructions and many boxes). At my last count a couple years back, I had a little over 105,000 pieces (this has since gone up as more sets have been bought). I can't simply add the totals from the new sets I've purchased as I also often buy parts by the cup full at the Lego store...

    The goofy things is that I was a far better, more creative builder as a kid and a teen, than I am in my mid-30's. :?

    Strangely, my 67 year old father has his own collection that is closing in fast on mine. He really likes Technic and will often buy multiple copies of the same set so that he can build alternate models without having to take apart the basic model. He sees the base model more as a display piece than a toy.

    It is my hope to someday move into a big enough house that I can build a large Lego railroad layout...

    Kongo on
This discussion has been closed.