@@__-ic7si Either you have done something wrong, or if you are not the subject of things becoming personal, you are being warned that a workshop is about to explode a little bit while they sort out what object has them upset. Source: My father in law is an engineer.
yes yes. Things that stress me out are illegal. mention a former US president? Go to jail. tell me to work on my taxes? right to jail. remind me Velika's a great being? jail.
Agreed. I've seen quite a few comments about connections being illegal on other posts and I'm always like "Whaaa..?" I was starting to think that there was some kind of Lego community that made certain types of connections invalid, but this video cleared that up. A connection that doesn't stress a brick = legal A connection that stresses a brick = illegal
@@NorthGaReptile but doesnt the pressed connection in itself stress the parts - of course they do! So this is a highly lawyery acedemic discussion that in itself destroyes and stresses our connection as humans. Yesterday a had some lego bricks from 1940/50s without cross support - we played and used cross plattform connections all the time - "press it ,until it holds" wood to plastic/metal whatever, i couldnt make out one broken brick! So what they hell - i am not building actual houses/hospitals out of lego bricks.
The thumbnail *was* clickbait, but clickbait isn't inherently good or bad. If the thumbnail gets you to click, and the content of the video is worthwhile, then the clickbait was worthwhile =)
You just answered two huge questions from my childhood (why they redesigned the clip piece and 1x1 cone piece) and I am thankful for the closure it provided me.
Then why is the LEGO Logo still outside, increasing the height by 0,1mm and why are the holes of these technic bricks still 0,05mm misaligned and why do technic bricks not have inside groves so you can put half pins inside them? 🥲
i think this is more of definition games. i’d think illegal building means any block combination that isn’t in the meta, which itself would be very fluid and hard to define
technically it means the QA guidelines sets go through before LEGO ships them, but sometimes there have been illegal techniques in official sets that were accidental
I have a lego spaceship I built that is so illegal it's actually cursed. I used lego, lego tech, and MegaConstrux. No one can touch it because there's a very specific way of handling it, otherwise it will start to fall apart.
@@chrislarson9504 2 different things bruh. That wheel thing he made is cursed but not illegal. Cursed is like bruh what the hell have u done with that lego. Illegal is a stress thing.
Wow I legitimately thought "that's illegal" comments about weird Lego techniques were jokes I had no idea there was even an official concept of illegality, let alone that people were actually being both sincere and mostly wrong
@@thesilverbeluga8539 That's true but I'll give it a pass since personally I'd like to see the apostrophe phased out of "it's". I think it's an unnecessary distinction.
For me, illegal techniques are usually a last resort when I can't figure out how to build something normally. I don't have a massive collection so I can't be too reckless with my bricks
I think it's important to further clarify that "illegal" is really just "contraindicated in Lego's official manual of how to design sets." Lego couldn't care one bit if people do any of this stuff. There's nothing wrong with it. It's not taboo or special. It's just not good practices for creating sensible, robust, elegant designs.
This is the comment I was looking for here!! I always get confused when people say illegal builds i always get a picture of police banging down doors at 5 a.m arresting people for misuse of lego🙄 🤣
@@twakka86 It's only an issue because "illegal" can mean two different things in English. Being against the law, ie you can be arrested for it. And just being against competition rules or something. Other languages use different words for these concepts so it's not as much of an issue. English has the same problem with "free". "Free software" doesn't mean what most people think it means, because it doesn't mean "free" as in "no charge".
I am guilty as charged for using so many illegal techniques 😂 that aside, great insight into these techniques coming from your experience as a Lego designer
As a kid, I used to love building Lego Star Wars sets 90's-00's. I recently bought the collector's Star Destroyer and was baffled when I was instructed to put the 2X1 flat piece inside the little clips, as I had always thought that you weren't supposed to do that. Glad I wasn't going crazy lol
I'm really trying to remember how often my brother and I used "illegal techniques" as kids. I'm pretty sure we used them a moderate amount -- perhaps somewhat above average. I definitely remember being aware of using the bricks in ways that they were not intended. I definitely remember using bricks in ways that could damage them. If it was POSSIBLE, we would do it. We definitely weren't thinking much about whether a technique was "advisable" or not, in any sense. We were just exercising our creativity.
“Most of the time” lol. Would love to hear a story (if one exists) of an illegal building technique that was caught by LEGO quality control, causing you to redesign in some way.
Iirc, the newer round pieces have a lip inside them to allow technic pins to expand, so that one is now (sometimes) legal, depending on whether it's the new piece.
My favourite obscure legal connection is a technic pin to the underside of a 1x1 brick with studs on 4 sides. The open studs actually give the pin room to properly expand and move freely, so while it may not be intentional it's not actually stressing anything and is, as such, fully legal! It was even used in an old M-Tron set once.
I'm pretty sure you're talking about Particle ionizer as I have that set at home and if I recall correctly the connection you mentioned was used for the "rotor" part
This is a super cool explanation. For instance I never knew why the 1x1 clip was redesigned with arms that - at first glance - made it look less sturdy. Lego Engineers and set designers are really amazing at what they do!
Unfortunately, these days even being an active LEGO designer and being embedded in the design and quality processes at the mothership doesn't seem to be a guarantee that no illegal building techniques make their way into official sets. Have you heard about the problem with 76205 Gargantos Showdown? If not, check out the article "Possible design flaw found in 2022 Super Heroes set" over on Brickset.
Glad u said that Oliver, because I swear I’ve built and wondered if that was what the instructions said, so just knowing ‘it’ happens makes it less questionable when it does occur. 🍻
Excellent 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻. You know Lego builders must have a pole up their arse if they're saying the wrong brick being used is illegal 😂. Pretty sure no laws are being broken in this video.
The technic bricks have holes that are slightly higher than the SNOT bricks because if the holes were the same height with the thickness they have, they wouldn't be able to fit on top of a standard Lego brick with the logo on the studs. Either way, there's some incompatibility between technic and standard bricks, and Lego simply chose the one less likely to cause problems.
I feel like some of these would take a REALLY LONG TIME to cause damage, though, obviously the official definition doesn't care about how long it would take.
@@jan7751-o4w Nope my big brother freehand built (as in it wasn't an actual set) a cathedral and left it built and forbade me fro doing anything with it or too it, much less touch it
Some could still be redesigned with no impact such as changing from a raised logo to a sunken LEGO. Others you have to really scratch your head - did LEGO really think people wouldn’t ever mix system with Technic?
I did all kinds of stuff with my Legos that warped and damaged them. As far as I was concerned this is what they were meant for, playing and being creative. Finding new ways to use the bricks was a big part of the fun.
That's exactly the point. No one will ever really sic the "Lego police" on you if you warp, bend, crush, paint, glue or eat your LEGOs. LEGOs are meant to be creative. Illegal is just shorthand for "You tried something fancy, and you broke the brick. Your fault mate, next time you'll be luckier" Still, many "illegal" tecnicques stress the bricks, but do no lasting damage on them. Good for you then ^_^
@@WEENUS157 Lego is creativity, we all know that. Every single kid (and sometimes not kids) in his past has is fair share of mishandled, manhandled, broken LEGO pieces. Sadly, today we live in a society where if someone breaks a LEGO piece he goes on Facebook complaining about "shoddy quaility"
I agree in principle but there is one genuine reason to educate and encourage people not to use illegal designs: there is a large used market for lego bricks, and they increase the risk of damaged bricks unintentionally ending up on the market.
@@DrTofu83 "Sadly, today we live in a society where if someone breaks a LEGO piece he goes on Facebook complaining about "shoddy quaility"" *[CITATION NEEDED]*
Seems like a simple minor redesign of some elements would eliminate some of illegality. For example, making the LEGO logo on studs an “innie” instead of an “outie”, or adjusting the top of the tube of a brick to allow a Technic pin to expand.
For a long long time I have wanted ot know what Legos actually considers illegal. With your background as a Lego employee, this goes above and beyond explaining why we shouldn't do illegal connections and what is an illegal connection.
I had no idea that the technic bricks and bricks with studs on the sides had slightly different heights on their holes and studs respectively, kinda feels like an oversight on legos part ngl, I alos never noticed how flat plates and studded plates are different in thickness, great video man! also that wheel that u showed off towards the end looks cool af
My definition of illegal building techniques before this video: Everything that doesn’t look like Lego would voluntarily put into a build instruction. My definition after: Everything that can batter the brick.
Even if they are tho, what normal human being would give a shit this video is so frustrating to me because it showed me a world I wasn't aware of, I dunno why youtube recommended it, I have no interest in bloody legos but to see so much elitism surrounding friggin legos only confirms to me that we live in a clown world and this shit needs to end on all fronts. people need to shut the fuck up and stop being elitist and controlling over every aspect of entertainment
“There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a Lego designer after being told that his techniques are illegal" - Some guy, probably
I remember back when a vertical plate between studs was in some official build instructions. Though that would've been close to 40 years ago at this point.
You didnt answer the real question though: How many former Lego designers spend their rest of their lifes rotting in danish prison cells for these illegal building techniques?
This is why i used to hate getting technique sets when i asked for lego’s for my birthday. It always seemed as if the bricks would fit in a certain way with regular lego’s, but then they ended up not fitting.
If you think your lego techniques are illegal, remember: I have willingly cut peices to size when I have lacked the right peice and colour, quite a few times.
Also: other companies have no problem in inventing new pieces that fit the purposes of the "illegal" building techniques, it's only LEGO that are too stupid to come up with good bricks :D
I was overjoyed when I learned that Lego redesigned those one by one clips because when I was a kid I remember the old designs broke a little too easily.
I was surprised that the maximally illegal move was not in this video, the one where you stick an Axle 2L or 3L into a Bohrok Shoulder with something placed in the gap, making all 3 pieces permanently locked together with no way to separate them without breaking one or more of the pieces
Would love to see some of this long term damage. I'm personally infamous for stressing bricks in my designs and despite having been assembled for years under tension they always spring back.
It appears to me that many of these "illegal" connections were just a lack of foresight on the original designs as far as cross-compatibility goes. In some cases they were directly addressed with a re-design and it seems that some of them are simply just too late to fix (e.g. technic vs. normal alignments & lego logo protrusion). Can you honestly say that with a blank design slate that all of these incompatibilities are necessary?
Lego could definitely engrave the Lego logo into pieces and increase design compatibility but I don't think it'd really be worth retooling everything they currently use unless it really opened up design opportunities.
@@bergauk The LEGO logo could easily be swapped from raised to recessed; the moulds used do have a finite lifespan, so while it would take several years they *could* choose to make this change. Whether it is worth it or not is probably mostly a question of principles. Is making a few, esoteric constructions "kosher" worth it vs. messing with a logo that has been unchanged for decades?
@@joet3935 it *may* have been used for that when it was first introduced, but then the bricks were of a simpler design. Current bricks have more fine detail on the underside, so if the mould is not completely filled I believe those will suffer before the logo on the studs is affected. Also, injection moulding and material science has advanced a bit since then (50+ years ago?), with material quality, injection pressure, temperature and volume under far more precise control now. I don't think the logo serves as anything but branding these days.
This is awesome! I would always direct any non-Lego friends to the "Stressing the Elements" powerpoint by Jamie Berard when they'd hear me talking about my builds or see the ever so misunderstood memes, but this more 'hands-on' video is way more intuitive and thorough (as well as being more modern with the new cone and 1x1 tile with clip molds).
@@TiagoCatarino Some of the old illegal builds from that powerpoint are outdated now, like sticking a transparent bar in the hole of another transparent part. The new trans clear material is not polycarbonate any more, it's the softer MABS now, so the friction is same as regular opaque bricks. That's why we see so many new recolored parts in transparent nowadays.
That PowerPoint presentation should be required viewing for many builders. We stumbled upon that presentation and re-presented it at one of our LUG meetings.
I have seen so many videos talking about what's legal and illegal when it comes to building legos and I almost didn't click on this video, thinking I knew everything it was gonna say. But then I did anyway and actually learned so much more about the topic and also how to identify it more easily. Thanks a lot for the info.
I always thought it was just aesthetic stuff LEGO designers couldn't use or what looked like the pieces didn't line up in instructions. Turns out I was also wrong.
@@TiagoCatarino Not just LEGO. You can do a lot of kitbashing with any given kit, even sanding, gluing or putting undue stress on the used parts. If it works, works. If it doesn't, you just failed, no big deal :P
3:07 Sadly it's not, it still gets stressed and ultimately broken. I have several new clips and they're mostly broken, I didn't even use any illegal techniques similarly in the video, only had them clipped on some bars and they're still broken so no new clip design doesn't really help
Nope it happens all the time. I mean I'm totally unable to notice when they break but whenever I check them, there's always cracks so idk if humidity can affect the plastic tho
My first thought when I heard about illegal builds... "Dude! These are my Legos. The whole point is to be creative. How can anything I do with them be illegal." Lego set designer: "Some things will wear out or damage your legos." Me: "Alright. Yeah. I'll go with that." ...though I still think "illegal" might be a little strong.
Its kinda funny how I as a kid, didnt know that these are actually called illegal techniques, whenever I or my friends tried to build something using thes techniques I said it just didnt felt right to do it that way. So I kinda got a feeling for illegal techniques... I should become a Lego police officer!
Lots of these cases seem so close to being fine but there is just a 0.01 mm difference or something that makes them not work. I would love to know the reasons why there are these slight differences? (e.g. why weren't the holes designed at exactly the same height, etc)
Fun fact: The cover of LEGO Harry Potter: Years 5-7 features an illegal building technique. The Godric Gryffindor's sword uses a clip holding a tile and when you look closer, it's definitely the old one (btw, the new one didn't even exist back then).
For me, I feel a bit upset about some of the Bionicle Sets or combiners as some of them would be stressing pieces out in the long run and could damage them. It is crazy to see that some of them have slipped under the radar and was released
Okay, my mind is blown right now. I knew about the logo on the studs making some connections illegal, but I never would have thought that the hole in a technic brick is positioned a little heigher than the stud on a headlight brick. Why is that even the case? Is it to make room for the stud of another brick when you connect that to the bottom of the technic brick? And why does the stud of the indented headlight brick extend just a little out of the volume of a regular 1x1x1 brick? Or why don't those bracket pieces fit? It makes no sense to me.
That bracket problem caused me so much headache I always make coplex multi-directional builds, and sometimes I have no other way to solve the building promblem, than that. (Also I clamp it down quite securely with other parts, and put some distance between them to make more room for the parts to flex, but I just don't get it why). I can only hope Tiago sees us, and gives an answer.
@@abelnemeth4346 Yeah, that double bracket construction looks very useful, if only it were legal. I think LEGO themselves used a similar trick with two of those 2x2 modified plates with 2 studs on one side for the wings of the UCS B-Wing Starfighter, so why can't the same thing be done with brackets?
@@minervszombies I think on the B-wing you’re thinking of part 4654577 (99206) that you can see coming together on page 25 of the second book. I have no idea why the brackets don’t fit together though. Would love to learn the history behind that one.
For the headlight 1x1 element; when turned on its side; it is 2 plates high, and the top stud is now flush with the bricks below it. Edit. Classic Space Polaris-1 Space Lab set used this technique for the rocket lab thing
I've been living the thug lyfe since childhood making "illegal" connections for certain spacing or angles and got annoyed when people scream this or that is an illegal technique. This was actually informative as to what it means, cool! Actively breaking your parts isn't cool, though.
The tombstone tile blew my mind - so you're saying Lego made the one with print slightly thinner just to place it like this in this specific set? Like making a new mould for manufacturing for this etc?
@@TiagoCatarino Is it really just the thickness difference that makes it legal or the fact that tiles also have a groove that reduces the edge contact with the studs bottom radius? The pentagonal shield in your example has additionally a big chamfer as well. What about the old style of tiles without the groove? Those should be illegal as well, right? I found some dimensions on the internet: Tile 3.14mm, plate modified (jumper) 3.17 mm and regular plate 3.2 mm. Are they true?
I did a lot of plate connections (03:50) in the '80's with my Lego's. If you wanted to make a slum or a shed, that plate connection was the way to go and looked the most natural. Since then, Lego had lot of time improving them to release the stress in the plates that way. If they can improve the cones (03:17) to make former "illegal techniques" legal, they can do the same with the plates.
@@affegpus4195 Yes, but calling a plate connection like I did for sheds or slums illegal is way to dramatic. It's not illegal to put just one plate and after a few knobs another one.
@@ardmichielsen2977If you are a Lego engineer, you are not allowed to do that. As an end customer you can do with it whatever you want, of course (subject to the criminal code), but illegal builds will void the warranty.
@@davidwuhrer6704But Lego had/has had enough time to make this "illegal" construction possible by adapting the plates. I made many "slums" this way in the '80s, so Lego has been dormant for over 40 years adjusting the plates to make it work.
I have never, in all my casual years of playing with Legos, heard "illegal" used. I have, though, wondered about those very subtle gaps. Learned a lot of un-useful information, but I'm happy to have learned it all the same.
Same here. As soon as I saw the title, I was like, _"Who tf is out here arresting people for putting Legos together wrong ?"_ Seems like a really bad term for this lol. 💀
@@davidwuhrer6704 Nope, still doesn't work. An illegal chess move is one that is against the rules. Rules that the players agree to uphold. Lego has no such rules.
2:46 this works with chinese clones, though. I understand why Lego made this choice of mould, but it wasn't the best one, and clone brackets perfectly allow this, with very minimal drawbacks.
This is really cool and insightful, thank you for sharing. I was wondering if you could share more about what is different between a single stud plate going into a technic brick vs a larger plate doing the same and why one is okay but the other is illegal, what specifically is it about a multiple stud plate attempting that connection that makes it illegal?
What about two cheese slopes turned against each other? I've seen many MOCs implementing two cheese slopes jammed into a 1x1 space. I've tried it myself but it seems slightly to tight in my opinion. Legal or illegal?
I guess eating or stepping on lego bricks is also an illegal building technique because it puts stress and strain on the parts in a way they weren't designed for too
I was unaware that there was such a thing as 'illegal' Lego building... idk how this ended up in my recommended, but you've given me *SO* much ammo to use against my niece next time we play with Legos... even after the video explanation, I still don't know what constitutes 'illegal', but the fact the concept exists? *I'm about to drive my niece crazy!* Oh man, there is so much potential in this... it's gonna be great! 🤣😂🤣😂
To summarize, a Lego building technique is ‘illegal’ when it places stress on a Lego piece that said piece was not designed to withstand. A good rule of thumb for determining a technique’s legality is whether or not you have to force the Lego pieces into the configuration in a manner that creates tension/stress in the build/linkage. If stress is created, the technique is most likely ‘illegal’ as Lego pieces are generally designed to interface with one another in a non-stress inducing manner, as stress in a system is a good way to cause deformation and breakage of the affected parts.
@@ladyravendale1 ah. That's interesting, but I'm totally going to be randomly saying "that's illegal" when I'm playing with my niece. Just to drive the kid nuts. What else is an uncle for? 🤣😂🤣😂
unless you try to put it in sideways there's 0 issue as the measurements won't allow the plate to excerb sideways stress to the clip arms. Unlike in the first version.
SUBSCRIBING is legal
Buy LEGO to support the channel ❯ bit.ly/48N1nd5
Keep up the amazing quality videos. 👏👌👍😊
I did!
Now THAT is an absolutely educational video on what not to do with Lego bricks.
Really enjoyed that one, including your clear anger about the illegal thing 😁
So explain the nasa Saturn Apollo 5 set. The micro U.S. Flag is wedged into the plate
You know you made a terrible mistake when the lego engineer tells you “this is personal”
When he said that I felt sad :(
This man Legos like a boss.
When any engineer tells you "this is personal" you've screwed up.
Imagine it’s your first day at the job.
@@__-ic7si Either you have done something wrong, or if you are not the subject of things becoming personal, you are being warned that a workshop is about to explode a little bit while they sort out what object has them upset.
Source: My father in law is an engineer.
I'm glad you are explaining the reasons behind the rules because some people will just give a list of ways no to build and thats a little annoying
I try!
but there are no rules when it comes to LEGO. anybody that says there are rules is a communist.
@@orion7741 why communist?
@@NoNameAtAll2
Because by saying "communist" he too can politicalize fu*cking legos.
@@orion7741 So... you're an anti-LEGO-communist LEGO-anarchist? That's new.
"So, how did you end up in jail?"
Me: Illegal Lego builds
Oh hello.
*Scoots away*
@@bigpapi5343lol
hey it the guy from trackmania
It would be hilarious in-joke if they put that in some lego movie...
Now that is the proper dictionary definition needed to be said about what an "Illegal" technique is. Thanks for the lesson!
Agreed
yes yes. Things that stress me out are illegal.
mention a former US president? Go to jail. tell me to work on my taxes? right to jail. remind me Velika's a great being? jail.
@@cyanimation1605 lol as a Bionicle fan, that last one really cracked me up lol
Agreed. I've seen quite a few comments about connections being illegal on other posts and I'm always like "Whaaa..?"
I was starting to think that there was some kind of Lego community that made certain types of connections invalid, but this video cleared that up.
A connection that doesn't stress a brick = legal
A connection that stresses a brick = illegal
@@NorthGaReptile but doesnt the pressed connection in itself stress the parts - of course they do! So this is a highly lawyery acedemic discussion that in itself destroyes and stresses our connection as humans.
Yesterday a had some lego bricks from 1940/50s without cross support - we played and used cross plattform connections all the time - "press it ,until it holds" wood to plastic/metal whatever, i couldnt make out one broken brick! So what they hell - i am not building actual houses/hospitals out of lego bricks.
This thumbnail looked so clickbait, but realizing you uploaded it, I knew I was going to learn something new and surprising by watching it.
Clickbait UA-cam is a thing of the past!
@@TiagoCatarino If only...
@@TiagoCatarino Definitely... I have a dream...
@@TiagoCatarino I wish
The thumbnail *was* clickbait, but clickbait isn't inherently good or bad. If the thumbnail gets you to click, and the content of the video is worthwhile, then the clickbait was worthwhile =)
You just answered two huge questions from my childhood (why they redesigned the clip piece and 1x1 cone piece) and I am thankful for the closure it provided me.
I was one of the kids who pushed in that old cone as hard as I could. It felt satisfying.
I don't like the new clips. They break too easily.
@@jenelle5331i personally find the old clips to break way more easily than the new ones
I actually despise the clip piece redesign, it breaks so easily, even just with time.
It's really interesting to learn that the Lego designers are actually modifying pieces to be more versatile and durable.
Then why is the LEGO Logo still outside, increasing the height by 0,1mm and why are the holes of these technic bricks still 0,05mm misaligned and why do technic bricks not have inside groves so you can put half pins inside them? 🥲
@@Einheit101 the lego logo is there to identify it as a lego brand brick
@@MakenaForest they could sink it in instead
@@Einheit101 that would weaken the stud
@@Einheit101 because these are all intended parts of the pieces?
"Is this legal?"
Lego engineers modifying bricks, summoning their best Darth Sidious voice: "I will make it legal"
Some consider my technique.... UnNatural.
The CAD software of lego is a pathway to many pieces some may consider legal.
The dark side of the LEGO leads to many building techniques some consider to be... unnatural.
"Where can I learn these building techniques?" "Not from a Lego engineer..."
@@thesharklord Jump cut to a 3 year old mashing bricks together, but cut specifically into points where they do something illegal that works
I thought "illegal Lego techniques" was just a meme for any builds that were unusual, didn't know it was an actual thing!
There's not actual laws against it brother
i think this is more of definition games. i’d think illegal building means any block combination that isn’t in the meta, which itself would be very fluid and hard to define
@@jay_344nah it means any technique that can put strain on the pieces
technically it means the QA guidelines sets go through before LEGO ships them, but sometimes there have been illegal techniques in official sets that were accidental
in Denmark you go straight to jail if they find any of those in the annual lego inspection
There's a difference between a build being "illegal" and a build being "cursed"
illegal is the proper term. but i guess cursed is the genZ word for it that can work
I have a lego spaceship I built that is so illegal it's actually cursed. I used lego, lego tech, and MegaConstrux. No one can touch it because there's a very specific way of handling it, otherwise it will start to fall apart.
@@chrislarson9504 2 different things bruh. That wheel thing he made is cursed but not illegal. Cursed is like bruh what the hell have u done with that lego. Illegal is a stress thing.
@@aidanissick Cursed doesn't fit in the context of any of these Lego builds though
@@visassess8607 “cursed” has kinda gotten a new meaning a few years ago, and it basically just now means “extremely fucking weird”
Wow I legitimately thought "that's illegal" comments about weird Lego techniques were jokes I had no idea there was even an official concept of illegality, let alone that people were actually being both sincere and mostly wrong
I thought exactly the same lol
I am not the resident expert on Lego builds, but your UA-cam comment is definitely 'Illegal'. Its spelled 'their', I fixed it for you...
@@entombedlamb5356 Uh no, "there" is correct. "Their" is possessive. "Their illegal Legos are there." not the other way around.
@@z-beeblebrox He also, ironically, used the wrong "it's"
@@thesilverbeluga8539 That's true but I'll give it a pass since personally I'd like to see the apostrophe phased out of "it's". I think it's an unnecessary distinction.
For me, illegal techniques are usually a last resort when I can't figure out how to build something normally.
I don't have a massive collection so I can't be too reckless with my bricks
She: " I love bad boys."
Him: "I'm an illegal Lego builder."
now these are illegal techniques, I'd thought I had seen it all but there was so many things I learnt today
Hello Puzzlego! I'm subbed to you!
When I was a kid, I was very offended when my cousin spray painted a Lego project. Somehow I'm glad that other people take this stuff personally.
I think it's important to further clarify that "illegal" is really just "contraindicated in Lego's official manual of how to design sets." Lego couldn't care one bit if people do any of this stuff. There's nothing wrong with it. It's not taboo or special. It's just not good practices for creating sensible, robust, elegant designs.
This is the comment I was looking for here!! I always get confused when people say illegal builds i always get a picture of police banging down doors at 5 a.m arresting people for misuse of lego🙄 🤣
@@twakka86 Someone should do a skit of this 🤣
Heck if anything they'd encourage it if it meant the customer buys more legos to replace the broken ones.
@@twakka86 It's only an issue because "illegal" can mean two different things in English. Being against the law, ie you can be arrested for it. And just being against competition rules or something. Other languages use different words for these concepts so it's not as much of an issue. English has the same problem with "free". "Free software" doesn't mean what most people think it means, because it doesn't mean "free" as in "no charge".
@@StormsparkPegasus err thanks for explaining!?! Kinda already knew the score pal but thanks anyway
I am guilty as charged for using so many illegal techniques 😂 that aside, great insight into these techniques coming from your experience as a Lego designer
Somebody arrest this man!!! :P
I did many illegal techniques as a kid, now I atleast know why it didn't fit back then 😂
Ah nothing a little glue wont fix lol
@@JoeKyser Eeek! Kragl!
@@rebeccachoice 😀
As a kid, I used to love building Lego Star Wars sets 90's-00's. I recently bought the collector's Star Destroyer and was baffled when I was instructed to put the 2X1 flat piece inside the little clips, as I had always thought that you weren't supposed to do that. Glad I wasn't going crazy lol
I was always so confused about illegal building techniques, now it makes sense illegal techniques stresses out the bricks or can damage them
same
when i was kid i didn’t understand how people decided the laws
but when i grew up i had this enlightenment:
law follows morality
@@raphaelnej8387 I really like they way up put that, also very true!
I'm really trying to remember how often my brother and I used "illegal techniques" as kids.
I'm pretty sure we used them a moderate amount -- perhaps somewhat above average. I definitely remember being aware of using the bricks in ways that they were not intended. I definitely remember using bricks in ways that could damage them. If it was POSSIBLE, we would do it. We definitely weren't thinking much about whether a technique was "advisable" or not, in any sense. We were just exercising our creativity.
@@UTU49 lego is such a great toy for flexing your creative muscle loved building whatever came to mind building techniques be damned
Thanh goodness. And here I was quickly pulling my lego apart thinking I was going to prison..
“Most of the time” lol.
Would love to hear a story (if one exists) of an illegal building technique that was caught by LEGO quality control, causing you to redesign in some way.
Iirc, the newer round pieces have a lip inside them to allow technic pins to expand, so that one is now (sometimes) legal, depending on whether it's the new piece.
In our LUG, we say "Technic and System bricks are not friends."
Not enemies, but not friends.
As an engineer the last time I said "I'll never do anything that is invalid", the QA always find my mistakes.
My favourite obscure legal connection is a technic pin to the underside of a 1x1 brick with studs on 4 sides. The open studs actually give the pin room to properly expand and move freely, so while it may not be intentional it's not actually stressing anything and is, as such, fully legal! It was even used in an old M-Tron set once.
I'm pretty sure you're talking about Particle ionizer as I have that set at home and if I recall correctly the connection you mentioned was used for the "rotor" part
I have it used in 75491 (Indominus set) as a base for the trees.
One more use for the Travis brick!
It was also used within the past year in another set, I think it got a mention on New Elementary
@Jesse Mathis exo force: sweats nervously
This is a super cool explanation. For instance I never knew why the 1x1 clip was redesigned with arms that - at first glance - made it look less sturdy. Lego Engineers and set designers are really amazing at what they do!
Holy moly, Legos are way more involved than i ever imagined
Unfortunately, these days even being an active LEGO designer and being embedded in the design and quality processes at the mothership doesn't seem to be a guarantee that no illegal building techniques make their way into official sets.
Have you heard about the problem with 76205 Gargantos Showdown? If not, check out the article "Possible design flaw found in 2022 Super Heroes set" over on Brickset.
Was it the Wolverine one?
@@zippolighter4903 No, the one with Doctor Strange and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Also the chinese set with the candle illegally clipped to the 1x1 tile with clip
Yeah that set screams that no one actually physically built the set and they just relied on a computer program
Glad u said that Oliver, because I swear I’ve built and wondered if that was what the instructions said, so just knowing ‘it’ happens makes it less questionable when it does occur. 🍻
I can't wait to defend the first case where my client is facing charges for "illegal Lego building techniques."
Excellent 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻. You know Lego builders must have a pole up their arse if they're saying the wrong brick being used is illegal 😂. Pretty sure no laws are being broken in this video.
@@TheOriginalBobbyMartini it's just the terminology the community uses, they don't actually mean or believe that it's against the law
@@TheOriginalBobbyMartini Least spastic Angloid boomer:
The conflicts with technique brick seems like more of a design oversight when the molds were introduced
The technic bricks have holes that are slightly higher than the SNOT bricks because if the holes were the same height with the thickness they have, they wouldn't be able to fit on top of a standard Lego brick with the logo on the studs. Either way, there's some incompatibility between technic and standard bricks, and Lego simply chose the one less likely to cause problems.
@@GarryDumblowski Then maybe the snot bricks should be the one redesigned. :P
Before you say something people, think about it. The man was a LEGO designer. He obviously knows more than we do.
_Nah man, I had a box with a bunch of Legos from Goodwill. Them techniques are illegal_
@@WanganTunedKeiCar What?
@@gmsniperx3623 Sarcasm.
@@Lokear Ohh, ok.
@@princessofthecape2078 I am neither a LEGO nerd nor a designer, so I don't really care about whether something is legal or illegal.
I feel like some of these would take a REALLY LONG TIME to cause damage, though, obviously the official definition doesn't care about how long it would take.
Exactly. The definition is based upon stuff that happens in the real world like kids building a set and leaving it built for years.
@@TiagoCatarino little siblings: are you sure about that?
@@TiagoCatarino I'm pretty sure it's only adult builders who ever leave their lego sets built for more than a few days.
@@jan7751-o4w idk where you get that assumption, I always tried to keep my sets in one piece as a kid
@@jan7751-o4w Nope my big brother freehand built (as in it wasn't an actual set) a cathedral and left it built and forbade me fro doing anything with it or too it, much less touch it
The wonders we could achieve if the Lego logo was recessed
For some of these it seems like they really could've designed them in a way that doesn't make those connections illegal.
Some could still be redesigned with no impact such as changing from a raised logo to a sunken LEGO.
Others you have to really scratch your head - did LEGO really think people wouldn’t ever mix system with Technic?
I did all kinds of stuff with my Legos that warped and damaged them. As far as I was concerned this is what they were meant for, playing and being creative. Finding new ways to use the bricks was a big part of the fun.
That's exactly the point. No one will ever really sic the "Lego police" on you if you warp, bend, crush, paint, glue or eat your LEGOs.
LEGOs are meant to be creative.
Illegal is just shorthand for "You tried something fancy, and you broke the brick. Your fault mate, next time you'll be luckier"
Still, many "illegal" tecnicques stress the bricks, but do no lasting damage on them. Good for you then ^_^
@@DrTofu83 yeah,why do you think lego has tryed new things like paper and legos.
@@WEENUS157 Lego is creativity, we all know that. Every single kid (and sometimes not kids) in his past has is fair share of mishandled, manhandled, broken LEGO pieces.
Sadly, today we live in a society where if someone breaks a LEGO piece he goes on Facebook complaining about "shoddy quaility"
I agree in principle but there is one genuine reason to educate and encourage people not to use illegal designs: there is a large used market for lego bricks, and they increase the risk of damaged bricks unintentionally ending up on the market.
@@DrTofu83 "Sadly, today we live in a society where if someone breaks a LEGO piece he goes on Facebook complaining about "shoddy quaility""
*[CITATION NEEDED]*
Seems like a simple minor redesign of some elements would eliminate some of illegality. For example, making the LEGO logo on studs an “innie” instead of an “outie”, or adjusting the top of the tube of a brick to allow a Technic pin to expand.
For a long long time I have wanted ot know what Legos actually considers illegal. With your background as a Lego employee, this goes above and beyond explaining why we shouldn't do illegal connections and what is an illegal connection.
Glad I could help!
This video will be used in a court if the LEGO cops decide to arrest Tiago.
NOOOOO
I had no idea that the technic bricks and bricks with studs on the sides had slightly different heights on their holes and studs respectively, kinda feels like an oversight on legos part ngl, I alos never noticed how flat plates and studded plates are different in thickness, great video man! also that wheel that u showed off towards the end looks cool af
My definition of illegal building techniques before this video: Everything that doesn’t look like Lego would voluntarily put into a build instruction.
My definition after: Everything that can batter the brick.
0:13 I'm 26 years old and this is the very first flex I actually care about
So wait... You mean my child I'm his room playing with Legos is likely commiting numerous crimes?
imagine telling a former lego employee that their builds are illegal
Even if they are tho, what normal human being would give a shit
this video is so frustrating to me because it showed me a world I wasn't aware of, I dunno why youtube recommended it, I have no interest in bloody legos but to see so much elitism surrounding friggin legos only confirms to me that we live in a clown world and this shit needs to end on all fronts.
people need to shut the fuck up and stop being elitist and controlling over every aspect of entertainment
That was a great video!
Oh no
@@TiagoCatarino "Oh no" 🤣🤣
@@TiagoCatarino what have you done. You promised to protect the brick not destroy them
Some men just want to watch the world burn...
Man, this is funny
Wow the fact there is such a thing as illegal associated with a toy says it all
“There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a Lego designer after being told that his techniques are illegal"
- Some guy, probably
Very nice to see a thorough breakdown of *why* certain techniques are illegal.
My man managed to defend his honor and put a lot of famous moc builders into question all in the same video!
I remember back when a vertical plate between studs was in some official build instructions. Though that would've been close to 40 years ago at this point.
You didnt answer the real question though: How many former Lego designers spend their rest of their lifes rotting in danish prison cells for these illegal building techniques?
That's classified...
@@TiagoCatarino So your saying its more then 1...
Funny!
@@TiagoCatarino I thought the NWO was frightening……
This is why i used to hate getting technique sets when i asked for lego’s for my birthday. It always seemed as if the bricks would fit in a certain way with regular lego’s, but then they ended up not fitting.
If you think your lego techniques are illegal, remember:
I have willingly cut peices to size when I have lacked the right peice and colour, quite a few times.
Currently debating doing so with old blue 16x32 baseplates to have my ocean water flush with the wall. Still haven't bit the bullet though.
That's just messed up
you should be put on trial for crimes against humanity.
Also: other companies have no problem in inventing new pieces that fit the purposes of the "illegal" building techniques, it's only LEGO that are too stupid to come up with good bricks :D
I was overjoyed when I learned that Lego redesigned those one by one clips because when I was a kid I remember the old designs broke a little too easily.
I always wondered why people would say something was an illegal technique. Now I know
I was surprised that the maximally illegal move was not in this video, the one where you stick an Axle 2L or 3L into a Bohrok Shoulder with something placed in the gap, making all 3 pieces permanently locked together with no way to separate them without breaking one or more of the pieces
I would love to see that hard to picture it in my mind
@@thatonewelshguy6959 Seconded. I can't imagine what it would look like at all.
I don't know the names of the pieces so I'd like to see a picture as well
@@reidskull5018 but if someone makes a video of that they will get a lot of hate for PLAYING the wrong way
F
Would love to see some of this long term damage. I'm personally infamous for stressing bricks in my designs and despite having been assembled for years under tension they always spring back.
I was surprised by how interesting this video is
It appears to me that many of these "illegal" connections were just a lack of foresight on the original designs as far as cross-compatibility goes. In some cases they were directly addressed with a re-design and it seems that some of them are simply just too late to fix (e.g. technic vs. normal alignments & lego logo protrusion). Can you honestly say that with a blank design slate that all of these incompatibilities are necessary?
completely NOT necessary. They done f'd up and are still charging an arm and leg for bobo products. GARBAGE.
Lego could definitely engrave the Lego logo into pieces and increase design compatibility but I don't think it'd really be worth retooling everything they currently use unless it really opened up design opportunities.
@@bergauk The LEGO logo could easily be swapped from raised to recessed; the moulds used do have a finite lifespan, so while it would take several years they *could* choose to make this change. Whether it is worth it or not is probably mostly a question of principles. Is making a few, esoteric constructions "kosher" worth it vs. messing with a logo that has been unchanged for decades?
@@koma-k I thought the LEGO Logo was a quality control device, like making sure the plastic was liquid enough to get all the way into the mold.
@@joet3935 it *may* have been used for that when it was first introduced, but then the bricks were of a simpler design. Current bricks have more fine detail on the underside, so if the mould is not completely filled I believe those will suffer before the logo on the studs is affected. Also, injection moulding and material science has advanced a bit since then (50+ years ago?), with material quality, injection pressure, temperature and volume under far more precise control now.
I don't think the logo serves as anything but branding these days.
This is awesome! I would always direct any non-Lego friends to the "Stressing the Elements" powerpoint by Jamie Berard when they'd hear me talking about my builds or see the ever so misunderstood memes, but this more 'hands-on' video is way more intuitive and thorough (as well as being more modern with the new cone and 1x1 tile with clip molds).
Based this video on that powerpoint!
@@TiagoCatarino Some of the old illegal builds from that powerpoint are outdated now, like sticking a transparent bar in the hole of another transparent part. The new trans clear material is not polycarbonate any more, it's the softer MABS now, so the friction is same as regular opaque bricks. That's why we see so many new recolored parts in transparent nowadays.
That PowerPoint presentation should be required viewing for many builders. We stumbled upon that presentation and re-presented it at one of our LUG meetings.
catarino: "i don't make illegal builds, and as proof i'll make a ton of illegal builds!"
I have seen so many videos talking about what's legal and illegal when it comes to building legos and I almost didn't click on this video, thinking I knew everything it was gonna say. But then I did anyway and actually learned so much more about the topic and also how to identify it more easily. Thanks a lot for the info.
I always thought illegal lego techniques were just a meme. I was wrong
Yeah me too, I was just kidding he was using illegal technics💀
I always thought it was just aesthetic stuff LEGO designers couldn't use or what looked like the pieces didn't line up in instructions. Turns out I was also wrong.
It is a very serious business at LEGO!
@@TiagoCatarino Not just LEGO. You can do a lot of kitbashing with any given kit, even sanding, gluing or putting undue stress on the used parts. If it works, works. If it doesn't, you just failed, no big deal :P
The terms "legal" and "illegal" are so weird for something you can always legally do with your own Lego sets.
It's pretty obvious what it means to anyone with a brain though.
Such a clear definition and great examples!! Honestly didn't realize what was bad about using illegal connections. Very cool to see! Thank you!
3:07 Sadly it's not, it still gets stressed and ultimately broken. I have several new clips and they're mostly broken, I didn't even use any illegal techniques similarly in the video, only had them clipped on some bars and they're still broken so no new clip design doesn't really help
Just curious does it seem to happen more when the air is dry?
During the Winter for example.
Nope it happens all the time. I mean I'm totally unable to notice when they break but whenever I check them, there's always cracks so idk if humidity can affect the plastic tho
My first thought when I heard about illegal builds...
"Dude! These are my Legos. The whole point is to be creative. How can anything I do with them be illegal."
Lego set designer: "Some things will wear out or damage your legos."
Me: "Alright. Yeah. I'll go with that."
...though I still think "illegal" might be a little strong.
Its kinda funny how I as a kid, didnt know that these are actually called illegal techniques, whenever I or my friends tried to build something using thes techniques I said it just didnt felt right to do it that way. So I kinda got a feeling for illegal techniques... I should become a Lego police officer!
HEY!
@@necroseus A man in Lego City is building with illegal techniques! Arrest him!
Lots of these cases seem so close to being fine but there is just a 0.01 mm difference or something that makes them not work. I would love to know the reasons why there are these slight differences? (e.g. why weren't the holes designed at exactly the same height, etc)
Fun fact: The cover of LEGO Harry Potter: Years 5-7 features an illegal building technique. The Godric Gryffindor's sword uses a clip holding a tile and when you look closer, it's definitely the old one (btw, the new one didn't even exist back then).
For me, I feel a bit upset about some of the Bionicle Sets or combiners as some of them would be stressing pieces out in the long run and could damage them. It is crazy to see that some of them have slipped under the radar and was released
Okay, my mind is blown right now. I knew about the logo on the studs making some connections illegal, but I never would have thought that the hole in a technic brick is positioned a little heigher than the stud on a headlight brick. Why is that even the case? Is it to make room for the stud of another brick when you connect that to the bottom of the technic brick? And why does the stud of the indented headlight brick extend just a little out of the volume of a regular 1x1x1 brick? Or why don't those bracket pieces fit? It makes no sense to me.
That bracket problem caused me so much headache I always make coplex multi-directional builds, and sometimes I have no other way to solve the building promblem, than that. (Also I clamp it down quite securely with other parts, and put some distance between them to make more room for the parts to flex, but I just don't get it why). I can only hope Tiago sees us, and gives an answer.
@@abelnemeth4346 Yeah, that double bracket construction looks very useful, if only it were legal. I think LEGO themselves used a similar trick with two of those 2x2 modified plates with 2 studs on one side for the wings of the UCS B-Wing Starfighter, so why can't the same thing be done with brackets?
@@minervszombies I think on the B-wing you’re thinking of part 4654577 (99206) that you can see coming together on page 25 of the second book.
I have no idea why the brackets don’t fit together though. Would love to learn the history behind that one.
@@lukewells7632 Yup, that's the one I mean
For the headlight 1x1 element; when turned on its side; it is 2 plates high, and the top stud is now flush with the bricks below it. Edit. Classic Space Polaris-1 Space Lab set used this technique for the rocket lab thing
If these illegalities were a crime, I would have been a criminal as a kid.
I had no idea there was such a thing as an "illegal" build before. This channel is fascinating.
You must be new to lego
@@WalnutAnimations I built a lot when I was a kid, but only just picked it up again as an adult. So far I'm about 10 sets deep and loving it.
@@BeerBourbonandGames yeah it’s amazing for all ages
@@WalnutAnimations it really is! Currently I working on the new sonic the hedge hog set.
@@BeerBourbonandGames wow same!
I've been living the thug lyfe since childhood making "illegal" connections for certain spacing or angles and got annoyed when people scream this or that is an illegal technique. This was actually informative as to what it means, cool!
Actively breaking your parts isn't cool, though.
"Hey, what are you in for?"
"Illegal Lego techniques..."
Now you have to build something just with illegal techniques
I can't! It's physically impossible for me!
The tombstone tile blew my mind - so you're saying Lego made the one with print slightly thinner just to place it like this in this specific set? Like making a new mould for manufacturing for this etc?
All tiles are slightly thinner than plates!
@@TiagoCatarino Is it really just the thickness difference that makes it legal or the fact that tiles also have a groove that reduces the edge contact with the studs bottom radius? The pentagonal shield in your example has additionally a big chamfer as well. What about the old style of tiles without the groove? Those should be illegal as well, right?
I found some dimensions on the internet: Tile 3.14mm, plate modified (jumper) 3.17 mm and regular plate 3.2 mm. Are they true?
@@R0Sch88 to my knowledge just the thickness. Old tiles if they have the same height, still legal.
The beginning is so wonderful, thats like telling beethoven to listen to moonlight sonata
I did a lot of plate connections (03:50) in the '80's with my Lego's. If you wanted to make a slum or a shed, that plate connection was the way to go and looked the most natural. Since then, Lego had lot of time improving them to release the stress in the plates that way. If they can improve the cones (03:17) to make former "illegal techniques" legal, they can do the same with the plates.
Smart
Decreasing plate thickness would however break everything else
@@affegpus4195 Yes, but calling a plate connection like I did for sheds or slums illegal is way to dramatic. It's not illegal to put just one plate and after a few knobs another one.
@@ardmichielsen2977If you are a Lego engineer, you are not allowed to do that.
As an end customer you can do with it whatever you want, of course (subject to the criminal code), but illegal builds will void the warranty.
@@davidwuhrer6704But Lego had/has had enough time to make this "illegal" construction possible by adapting the plates. I made many "slums" this way in the '80s, so Lego has been dormant for over 40 years adjusting the plates to make it work.
I have never, in all my casual years of playing with Legos, heard "illegal" used. I have, though, wondered about those very subtle gaps.
Learned a lot of un-useful information, but I'm happy to have learned it all the same.
Same here. As soon as I saw the title, I was like, _"Who tf is out here arresting people for putting Legos together wrong ?"_ Seems like a really bad term for this lol. 💀
That's because the term is inapplicable. Until Lego starts their own nation, they have no power to declare anything illegal.
@@LlortnerofIllegal in the sense that a chess move is illegal.
@@davidwuhrer6704 Nope, still doesn't work. An illegal chess move is one that is against the rules. Rules that the players agree to uphold. Lego has no such rules.
@@Llortnerof What nation does chess have that gives it the power to declare something illegal?
I guess the FEDs are outside wiretapping my house due to mixing brands .
2:46 this works with chinese clones, though. I understand why Lego made this choice of mould, but it wasn't the best one, and clone brackets perfectly allow this, with very minimal drawbacks.
Finally someone properly explains what are illegal techniques and why!
Super educational and detailed!
When i was a kid my dream job was basically what you did: design lego kits. Watching this bringa back so many happy memories.
This is really cool and insightful, thank you for sharing.
I was wondering if you could share more about what is different between a single stud plate going into a technic brick vs a larger plate doing the same and why one is okay but the other is illegal, what specifically is it about a multiple stud plate attempting that connection that makes it illegal?
Ive been using lego bricks how I see fit since I first owned them in the late 70s. Im not gonna stop making things just becuase its illegal.
Legos are so important in Denmark that if the police find out your build is damaging lego bricks, you are arrested for "illegal Lego techniques".
What about two cheese slopes turned against each other? I've seen many MOCs implementing two cheese slopes jammed into a 1x1 space.
I've tried it myself but it seems slightly to tight in my opinion.
Legal or illegal?
I've seen that done in sets - horizon express is a good example - so I HOPE it's legal 🙂
What IS illegal is....
not being subscribed to Tiago Catarino...
I just checked and i wasnt!!! I subbed now thanks to this comment! Please dont jail me
I guess eating or stepping on lego bricks is also an illegal building technique because it puts stress and strain on the parts in a way they weren't designed for too
I feel like this is an essential video to watch, it useful knowing what can damage my Lego
I was unaware that there was such a thing as 'illegal' Lego building... idk how this ended up in my recommended, but you've given me *SO* much ammo to use against my niece next time we play with Legos... even after the video explanation, I still don't know what constitutes 'illegal', but the fact the concept exists? *I'm about to drive my niece crazy!*
Oh man, there is so much potential in this... it's gonna be great! 🤣😂🤣😂
To summarize, a Lego building technique is ‘illegal’ when it places stress on a Lego piece that said piece was not designed to withstand. A good rule of thumb for determining a technique’s legality is whether or not you have to force the Lego pieces into the configuration in a manner that creates tension/stress in the build/linkage. If stress is created, the technique is most likely ‘illegal’ as Lego pieces are generally designed to interface with one another in a non-stress inducing manner, as stress in a system is a good way to cause deformation and breakage of the affected parts.
@@ladyravendale1 ah. That's interesting, but I'm totally going to be randomly saying "that's illegal" when I'm playing with my niece. Just to drive the kid nuts. What else is an uncle for? 🤣😂🤣😂
Lego was always about freedom to build anything in your imagination. I reject that anything should be considered "illegal" regardless of damage
Crazy thing is the official LEGO instructions often use damaging connections, as I can attest by the numerous broken bricks in my tubs.
In my experience, the new 1x1 clip design is a lot more fragile than the old design. Very scared of putting a plate in to the new clips
unless you try to put it in sideways there's 0 issue as the measurements won't allow the plate to excerb sideways stress to the clip arms. Unlike in the first version.
I used the plate between stud technique quite a lot
1:42 I'm sorry, WHAT?
So THAT'S what an "illegal LEGO build" really means! And it's for a perfectly good reason too! Glad I was able to finally find out :)
"keep commenting because it's good for the algorithm" is fucking savage and I am here for it
“Say not “illegal but “possibly problematic”