Page 1 of 3

Weekly Set Review: Royal King

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:33 pm
by architect
Join the weekly Classic Castle set review discussion. Please post your opinions on the set play ability, piece selection, design, etc. Which sets stand up to our catapult of critique and which ones crumble in shame!

This week’s set is 6008 Royal King.

Royal King was released in 1995 for the Royal Knights. The King comes with his trusty steed and various accessories.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:41 pm
by ed_dotcom
This has to be the most overused minifig in the KK faction. I never understood the reason for so many kings within a kingdom. I suppose the positives are the shield, sword, horse & saddle... But there is nothing at all special about this 'set'.

I'd give it a 2/10...I'd take 6009 over this set anyday, which was a MUCH better minifig set...

Life is Good.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 2:53 pm
by TwoTonic Knight
How many kings do you need? More specifically, how many crowns do you need? On the positive side, you get a lance, chrome sword and a kite shield. It isn't that expensive or difficult to swap out the crown for a helmet and make the fig useful, but making an inexpensive equestrian set for what should be a rare fig is disappointing after the excellence of 6009. 3/10

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:05 pm
by TheOrk
My very first LEGO set.
There were too many knigs in the Royal Knights but if you get rid of the crown, you have a great fig. 6/10

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:37 pm
by Dragon Master
This set is only good for small children who cannot afford to get the Royal Knights castle. There is really no point to it if you have the castle, and the king is dissapointing with no plume, cape, and his horse is naked.

I suppose one could always just forget about the king, and use that horse for another knight. But those white horses really add up.

Black Knight > King


PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 3:54 pm
by Sir Dillon
This was one of the first sets I bought with my own money. I really liked it at the time, but now I think the set is kinda lousy. You could say it's a good army biulder, but who wants a army of kings?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 4:47 pm
by JoshWedin
TwoTonic Knight wrote:How many kings do you need?

I second this wholeheartedly. I have a huge pile of crowns that I never use. I do like the head on this fig though. I don't have a lot of them. Just always been one of my favorites.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:01 pm
by Lord Mikal
This is the only Royal Knights set I have with the king included. I believe I got it as a freebee for placing a $100 order with S@H, but I could be wrong. What remotely suprised be about it was that, once I got the box open: No instructions. Not that I needed them, obviously, but I thought it was strange; considering they almost never make a set without instructions.

As for "how many kings do you need?" It kinda debends on how often you lose their crowns. I have two 'king' bodies and faces, but for some reason only one crown. And that just recently broke.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:16 pm
by Thrall1138
Ouch, sucks for your kings...

Anyway, You never know how many kings one person might need. Some one may need to make a clone army of kings and this set would be perfect :lol: . For getting some good swords, crowns, and lances in a small set I think this set needs a 6/10.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:25 pm
by HenrytheV
I'm tired of kings. Why can't you buy lords in sets like these? At least lords are different, and they have helmets, not crowns. I give it a 3/10

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:38 pm
by Athos
These one figure sets are pretty bad. Why couldn't they have made a minifig pack? King, two of each Royal Knights knights would have been much better. It was the set my first crown came in... but now of course I have hundreds of the stupid things.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 6:02 pm
by Norro
I guess it's left up to me to defend this set... I have always thought this torso makes a really good royal bodyguard look for that especially fearsome regiment. Not to mention the shield etc. As to crowns, I all ready had a lot from the accessory sets...
This is only the third king in the Royal Knights series anyway... I have more of the alpha team 'Dash' fig not to mention Mr. Thunnder... No point in even beginning to contrast thie usefulness of this fig with the recent jelly-beans... : )

God Bless,


PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 6:33 pm
by Blueandwhite
Well, he was the first LEGO King, so he has that going for him...

Too bad he wasn't the last :( .


PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:34 pm
by Dragonlord Esq.
Not all one-figure sets are bad. The Black Knight is one of my favorite small sets. However, I'll echo the "how many kings can you have?" sentiment. If the king had a cape and barding, I might get several of these sets and put armor and visors on the kings. But since it's pretty bare, 3.5/10

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:51 pm
by Formendacil
Well, at my current stage in life, I have to agree that this is a rather redundant set: had it come with a helm and normal sword instead of crown and chrome, it would have been awesome. Even in the its current form though, I would buy several if available again: white stallion-mounted, silver-sword wielding paladins aren't all that bad, and helms can be acquired.

I rather like this set for the nostalgia*. It was my first Royal Knights set, and my first king. I was really happy at the time about the release of a king, since I had always felt the sore lack of them in my Black Knights and Crusaders. When I later got the Castle, this king was transformed slightly to become the prince of the Royal Knights.

Parts: 4/10
Playability: 5.5/10
Figs/Accessories: 7/10
Design (then): 5.5/10
Deisgn (now): 6.5/10
Nostalgia: 8.5/10

Overall Score: 6.17/10

*And I have been sufficiently motivated to add another category to my scoring. See it in play in future reviews, as well...