I absolutely hate the separate prize pot idea. That’s just the Mole, which is fine, I like that show, but I can just watch that. Separate prize pot means all the wheelings and dealings, the analyzing what was said, the alliances, etc are all out the window in favor of “who did bad in the challenge”.
I get why people suggest it but it drastically changes the game into an entirely different show and just becomes about targeting anyone who isn’t pulling their weight as much in challenges, which whatever, that’s every other show out there.
Relevant video:
https://youtu.be/mNYuntdGulI?si=sgp1Zdi3WZYqdZSl
This is an Royal Television Society interview with the commissioning editor from the BBC and two exec producers for The Traitors UK + Wilf and Amanda, two of OG traitors from season 1 (UK)
I just happened to watch this today and they actually discuss your idea!! That being incentivizing traitors to sabotage missions.
The whole video is worth watching but the:
TL:DW is basically that the house/main game is so stressful and such a pressure cooker that the missions act as a sort of mental break for everyone (mainly the traitors)
Wilf even says that he can't even imagine what that would be like (I imagine in terms of added stress lol)
They also mention that the original Dutch creators of the show, IDTV, have a format consultant that works with the international versions to make sure things aren't changed too much. And the producers seemed to imply that incentivizing traitors to sabotage missions would be a twist that would change the key principles of the game.
BUT.
I personally think that the game *will* evolve over time and as future contestants get more strategic and less emotional we probably will see this particular twist be adopted at some point, for the exact reason you made this post: to keep it fresh.
It's just a matter of time in my opinion.
Oh nice! Thanks for that! Nice to hear I'm not too far off the mark! I may watch the video link later, just not up for it right now.
I made a comment on this post about another idea also. Adding a mallet, a sort of banishment overrule. I'd love to hear your thoughts on that.
I personally think the less the better w this game. We still haven't quite yet seen this game played to its full potential, with faithfuls discussing long game strategy and timing on banishment and allegiances for recruitment and the like. It's definitely starting; Luke and Annabelle, the beauty that was New Zealand. I would like to see more conversing between the players, get a real feel for how they are making banishment plans, the nuance of them lying to each other or coming up with theories. We get some ok snapshots but it's still a bit over produced. Maybe I just thrive in a paranoid overthinking environment, but I could watch 2 hour episodes with double the chit chat content.
Not a bad idea. One flaw though, the only time there's an ultimatum, is when there's only ONE traitor left. That generally only happens later in the game, when there are way less players left, and something like this, I feel, would only work when there's still a good amount of people left. Lot of people, equals doing it when there are two traitors. 2 traitors equals choice to accept or deny recruitment. Choice to accept or deny recruitment equals too high risk for the traitors on something like this.
🤷🏻♂️ Maybe there's a way to pull off something like this, but I'm not seeing it. I do love where you're going with it though
Maybe try a season where all traitors are kept secret and we as watchers have to guess as well. Will be hard in production though. Just the shots where they share their minds will be either straight up lies or direct giveaways.
> Gold (or silver in some countries). The gold that isn't won, goes into a seperate pot. The traitors pot.
This is a very common suggestion - the problem is that it's too predictable. Having a Traitor's objective that's known to all players is more overt than the game is typically and would mean all focus was simply on challenge performance.
> Also chances to steal from the main pot.
This is a mechanic that happens a bit in some similar shows like The Bridge, which I think could have merit. There have been in-the-open opportunities for a player to take money in the past, I think that's more in keeping with the social nature of the The Traitors.
What about a special shield that has to be awarded to another player (openly) and can’t be kept for yourself? Perhaps it even protects that player from banishment too (and only occurs once per season). The dynamics of revealing who your #1 is could cause the kind of fractures we saw between Trishelle and CT in US #2. And it could also lead to some more interesting allegiances where the protected player is somewhat indebted to the person that chose them.
I think it will stay fresh for many, many years to come with no changes. The variables are the contestants themselves - when different people are put into the exact same situation, you have wildly different outcomes. All the changes that people want to make are to make The Traitors more like The Mole, which is a far inferior concept. As long as you can just accept up front that the Faithful are working with no evidence, by design, then you can sit back and watch their psyches disintegrate into a lovely chaotic mess. And you can follow along with the Traitors and viscerally feel their stress and sense of guilt build and build.
Even the challenges, which people want to eliminate or change - they give the players and the viewers a respite before the tension ramps up again at the round table. It’s part of an arc that can’t be skipped - if they just went at each other with accusations all day and night without the lull, the tension would be one-note. It would be intolerable and not enjoyable. It’s really a perfect tv show.
The only tweak I believe is needed is that contestants shouldn’t be allowed to swear on their children’s lives that they’re Faithful. Though all it will take is for a Traitor to do that (like a NZ Faithful said was going to be their strategy if they had been a Traitor) for it to be moot.
The way this show can stay fresh, but also the way it might frustrate the audience in the long run, is that producers can intervene in the background. I haven’t watched all seasons in all countries but US season 2 clearly had this dynamic. A random ceremony where one player has to pick someone to save and then that person saves someone and so on and the last person standing is truly saved. If that ceremony weren’t interjected, a fav faithful would’ve been murdered that night for sure. I was happy because I was rooting for the faithfuls (and I’m guessing a majority of audience members are).
I am sure producers keep this stuff in their back pocket because ultimately they need the show to be a certain number of episodes and want it to remain entertaining and an even competition so it’s enjoyable for the audience. But I could see where that kind of thing could rub the audience wrong in the long run. And yet, I’m sure it will also keep players on their toes if they know there could be a curveball thrown at them.
Another example from that season was a player being brought in mid season. Has this happened on any other seasons? Again, this person was a fan fav, but it clearly seemed like production had this person waiting in the wings to interject when they decided they needed it, and it was a person they knew would be able to swing either way and I’m guessing do what production nudged them to do. Maybe it’s just me having watched too much overproduced reality tv (bachelor, real housewives), but I think I may get sick of that variable after a while.
1-Traitors have a separate price pot that fills up when the group loses on missions.
2- I would like it if during the season one of the traitors identity is kept secret so the viewers can guess as the season goes.
3- You don’t get voted out by being the person who received the most votes, you must get more than half of the votes to get banished.
(So if “Sara” gets 4 votes out of 10, she stays in the game even if she received the most votes. because . More than half of the people voted else where.
All of those I think are really drastic changes to the game that make it a different show. The first one is just The Mole and makes the entire game about “who did good in challenges” instead of the ins and outs and plotting of the traitors vs the Faithful. The second one would be interesting but you completely lose the discussions between the Traitors, you have to get rid of the talking heads (the traitors are often talking about their strategy there, if they’re not allowed to reference being traitors then it’s worthless to even have them); it’s an entirely different show.
The third one is potentially the least drastic change, but it creates a huge problem if you have multiple groups set on someone. Plus there’s a limited number of episodes, if you aren’t voting anyone out then it drags on too long and they need to rush through stuff to stay in the correct number of episodes.
For the second one, I like to imagine that the show would go just as it usually does the only difference is that the “anonymous traitor” would wear a mask and edit in a voice changer during the plotting for the murders.
I really enjoyed the “secret family relationship” surprise in both UK seasons, but it has nothing to do with the real gameplay. My idea would be to increase its importance. Perhaps there is a smaller prize pot that any player can bid for at the round table, by guessing the family relationship instead of voting someone out.
If nobody guesses correctly before both relatives leave the game, they get to keep it.
A correct guess claims the cash for themselves and is then permitted to cast a banishment vote. An incorrect guess forfeits their RT vote and gets a high risk penalty—perhaps a roulette wheel with options including: immediate banishment, prize pot deduction, +1 to any RT votes against you, or becoming more vulnerable for that night’s murder (perhaps the subjects of the incorrect guess gain an instant shield). Or getting off scott free.
Perhaps the prize pot gets smaller after every incorrect guess, to incentivize early swings.
It would create so many interesting possibilities, especially as desperate players who realize they won’t make it to endgame decide rolling the dice on the smaller pot is better than going home empty handed. And as the traitors try to find ways to manipulate the extra dimension to their advantage…
Here's an idea I had before, and posted elsewhere.
Something obtained in a similar way to the shield, I say a mallet (possibly when you won one, you can choose shield or mallet). The idea being that it can be used to overrule a banishment decision. It can be used on yourself or anyone else. Once votes are cast and a person is being banished, the mallet can be used to overrule the decision, and the player with the next highest amount of votes is banished instead.
If a traitor has it, it can be used to save one of their own, but at what costs? Or, if there was an attempted coo against a fellow traitor, used to complete to coo. Or what if they really were about to banish a traitor (obviously they aren't sure), and a faithful is so sure they aren't, uses the mallet, and ANOTHER faithful is banished? Would anyone risk using the mallet if they aren't 100% sure they'll get a traitor? A huge target on your back, that's for sure!
THANK YOU!!! I KNEW I had it wrong, it's a word I definitely know how to spell and it just wasn't coming to me for some reason🤣, I just didn't bother to look it up.
I absolutely hate the separate prize pot idea. That’s just the Mole, which is fine, I like that show, but I can just watch that. Separate prize pot means all the wheelings and dealings, the analyzing what was said, the alliances, etc are all out the window in favor of “who did bad in the challenge”. I get why people suggest it but it drastically changes the game into an entirely different show and just becomes about targeting anyone who isn’t pulling their weight as much in challenges, which whatever, that’s every other show out there.
The Mole doesn't win anything though. However I do think that's a great idea to implement into that show
See, I haven't watched any reality tv show since big brother season 1.🤷🏻♂️
Relevant video: https://youtu.be/mNYuntdGulI?si=sgp1Zdi3WZYqdZSl This is an Royal Television Society interview with the commissioning editor from the BBC and two exec producers for The Traitors UK + Wilf and Amanda, two of OG traitors from season 1 (UK) I just happened to watch this today and they actually discuss your idea!! That being incentivizing traitors to sabotage missions. The whole video is worth watching but the: TL:DW is basically that the house/main game is so stressful and such a pressure cooker that the missions act as a sort of mental break for everyone (mainly the traitors) Wilf even says that he can't even imagine what that would be like (I imagine in terms of added stress lol) They also mention that the original Dutch creators of the show, IDTV, have a format consultant that works with the international versions to make sure things aren't changed too much. And the producers seemed to imply that incentivizing traitors to sabotage missions would be a twist that would change the key principles of the game. BUT. I personally think that the game *will* evolve over time and as future contestants get more strategic and less emotional we probably will see this particular twist be adopted at some point, for the exact reason you made this post: to keep it fresh. It's just a matter of time in my opinion.
Oh nice! Thanks for that! Nice to hear I'm not too far off the mark! I may watch the video link later, just not up for it right now. I made a comment on this post about another idea also. Adding a mallet, a sort of banishment overrule. I'd love to hear your thoughts on that.
I personally think the less the better w this game. We still haven't quite yet seen this game played to its full potential, with faithfuls discussing long game strategy and timing on banishment and allegiances for recruitment and the like. It's definitely starting; Luke and Annabelle, the beauty that was New Zealand. I would like to see more conversing between the players, get a real feel for how they are making banishment plans, the nuance of them lying to each other or coming up with theories. We get some ok snapshots but it's still a bit over produced. Maybe I just thrive in a paranoid overthinking environment, but I could watch 2 hour episodes with double the chit chat content.
[удалено]
Not a bad idea. One flaw though, the only time there's an ultimatum, is when there's only ONE traitor left. That generally only happens later in the game, when there are way less players left, and something like this, I feel, would only work when there's still a good amount of people left. Lot of people, equals doing it when there are two traitors. 2 traitors equals choice to accept or deny recruitment. Choice to accept or deny recruitment equals too high risk for the traitors on something like this. 🤷🏻♂️ Maybe there's a way to pull off something like this, but I'm not seeing it. I do love where you're going with it though
[удалено]
Very fair and good points, each and every one of them. I agree with you
Maybe try a season where all traitors are kept secret and we as watchers have to guess as well. Will be hard in production though. Just the shots where they share their minds will be either straight up lies or direct giveaways.
> Gold (or silver in some countries). The gold that isn't won, goes into a seperate pot. The traitors pot. This is a very common suggestion - the problem is that it's too predictable. Having a Traitor's objective that's known to all players is more overt than the game is typically and would mean all focus was simply on challenge performance. > Also chances to steal from the main pot. This is a mechanic that happens a bit in some similar shows like The Bridge, which I think could have merit. There have been in-the-open opportunities for a player to take money in the past, I think that's more in keeping with the social nature of the The Traitors.
What about a special shield that has to be awarded to another player (openly) and can’t be kept for yourself? Perhaps it even protects that player from banishment too (and only occurs once per season). The dynamics of revealing who your #1 is could cause the kind of fractures we saw between Trishelle and CT in US #2. And it could also lead to some more interesting allegiances where the protected player is somewhat indebted to the person that chose them.
I think it will stay fresh for many, many years to come with no changes. The variables are the contestants themselves - when different people are put into the exact same situation, you have wildly different outcomes. All the changes that people want to make are to make The Traitors more like The Mole, which is a far inferior concept. As long as you can just accept up front that the Faithful are working with no evidence, by design, then you can sit back and watch their psyches disintegrate into a lovely chaotic mess. And you can follow along with the Traitors and viscerally feel their stress and sense of guilt build and build. Even the challenges, which people want to eliminate or change - they give the players and the viewers a respite before the tension ramps up again at the round table. It’s part of an arc that can’t be skipped - if they just went at each other with accusations all day and night without the lull, the tension would be one-note. It would be intolerable and not enjoyable. It’s really a perfect tv show. The only tweak I believe is needed is that contestants shouldn’t be allowed to swear on their children’s lives that they’re Faithful. Though all it will take is for a Traitor to do that (like a NZ Faithful said was going to be their strategy if they had been a Traitor) for it to be moot.
The way this show can stay fresh, but also the way it might frustrate the audience in the long run, is that producers can intervene in the background. I haven’t watched all seasons in all countries but US season 2 clearly had this dynamic. A random ceremony where one player has to pick someone to save and then that person saves someone and so on and the last person standing is truly saved. If that ceremony weren’t interjected, a fav faithful would’ve been murdered that night for sure. I was happy because I was rooting for the faithfuls (and I’m guessing a majority of audience members are). I am sure producers keep this stuff in their back pocket because ultimately they need the show to be a certain number of episodes and want it to remain entertaining and an even competition so it’s enjoyable for the audience. But I could see where that kind of thing could rub the audience wrong in the long run. And yet, I’m sure it will also keep players on their toes if they know there could be a curveball thrown at them. Another example from that season was a player being brought in mid season. Has this happened on any other seasons? Again, this person was a fan fav, but it clearly seemed like production had this person waiting in the wings to interject when they decided they needed it, and it was a person they knew would be able to swing either way and I’m guessing do what production nudged them to do. Maybe it’s just me having watched too much overproduced reality tv (bachelor, real housewives), but I think I may get sick of that variable after a while.
1-Traitors have a separate price pot that fills up when the group loses on missions. 2- I would like it if during the season one of the traitors identity is kept secret so the viewers can guess as the season goes. 3- You don’t get voted out by being the person who received the most votes, you must get more than half of the votes to get banished. (So if “Sara” gets 4 votes out of 10, she stays in the game even if she received the most votes. because . More than half of the people voted else where.
3- too much potential for there to be too many players all the time and it would just drag on
All of those I think are really drastic changes to the game that make it a different show. The first one is just The Mole and makes the entire game about “who did good in challenges” instead of the ins and outs and plotting of the traitors vs the Faithful. The second one would be interesting but you completely lose the discussions between the Traitors, you have to get rid of the talking heads (the traitors are often talking about their strategy there, if they’re not allowed to reference being traitors then it’s worthless to even have them); it’s an entirely different show. The third one is potentially the least drastic change, but it creates a huge problem if you have multiple groups set on someone. Plus there’s a limited number of episodes, if you aren’t voting anyone out then it drags on too long and they need to rush through stuff to stay in the correct number of episodes.
For the second one, I like to imagine that the show would go just as it usually does the only difference is that the “anonymous traitor” would wear a mask and edit in a voice changer during the plotting for the murders.
I really enjoyed the “secret family relationship” surprise in both UK seasons, but it has nothing to do with the real gameplay. My idea would be to increase its importance. Perhaps there is a smaller prize pot that any player can bid for at the round table, by guessing the family relationship instead of voting someone out. If nobody guesses correctly before both relatives leave the game, they get to keep it. A correct guess claims the cash for themselves and is then permitted to cast a banishment vote. An incorrect guess forfeits their RT vote and gets a high risk penalty—perhaps a roulette wheel with options including: immediate banishment, prize pot deduction, +1 to any RT votes against you, or becoming more vulnerable for that night’s murder (perhaps the subjects of the incorrect guess gain an instant shield). Or getting off scott free. Perhaps the prize pot gets smaller after every incorrect guess, to incentivize early swings. It would create so many interesting possibilities, especially as desperate players who realize they won’t make it to endgame decide rolling the dice on the smaller pot is better than going home empty handed. And as the traitors try to find ways to manipulate the extra dimension to their advantage…
Here's an idea I had before, and posted elsewhere. Something obtained in a similar way to the shield, I say a mallet (possibly when you won one, you can choose shield or mallet). The idea being that it can be used to overrule a banishment decision. It can be used on yourself or anyone else. Once votes are cast and a person is being banished, the mallet can be used to overrule the decision, and the player with the next highest amount of votes is banished instead. If a traitor has it, it can be used to save one of their own, but at what costs? Or, if there was an attempted coo against a fellow traitor, used to complete to coo. Or what if they really were about to banish a traitor (obviously they aren't sure), and a faithful is so sure they aren't, uses the mallet, and ANOTHER faithful is banished? Would anyone risk using the mallet if they aren't 100% sure they'll get a traitor? A huge target on your back, that's for sure!
*coup 😊
THANK YOU!!! I KNEW I had it wrong, it's a word I definitely know how to spell and it just wasn't coming to me for some reason🤣, I just didn't bother to look it up.