New Survivor rule!
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

The ClubHouse: Archives: New Survivor rule!
 SubtopicMsgs  Last Updated
Archive through April 13, 2002 25   04/16 11:06am

Spunky

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 03:30 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
What I meant was that the winner shouldn't be made to choose to give it up or keep it, everyone works hard to win immunity because that's the best garantie they have they'll be in the game.
Also, if they know they can pass immunity onto someone else we may not see a real struggle during the competition, some may give up right away thinking their alliance is strong and rely on that option.
The winner who wins immunity should keep it.
Imagine when the winner passes it onto someone else, the one who gets it will be targeted by the rest of the group and the one who gave it up will be next to go.

Car54

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 03:38 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Moon, you are exactly right! It makes the immunity MORE valuable, fair has nothing to do with it... you can use it yourself...but winning immunity can make you a target...now, if you are a likeable person and you win, you can use it as a bargaining chip.... give it to less popular person, use it to make alliances...in skillful hands it could be really good...I think a Rich/Rudy- a team with good alliance skills- would have found this a very useful thing to have.

For a strong individual competitor, this is a way to bring weaker players into your alliance...if you can win, you can offer them a chance to stay if they vote with you... this gives a lot of options to make things more intricate. The really big plotters have gone...not sure if these guys will see the possibilities.

I am really intrigued with this option and I wish we knew more about exactly how MB thought this could be used. The thing that is hanging me up is that Jeff really described it as a bartering tool.

I honestly believe that SOMEBODY is gonna use this...it seems hard to imagine, but if they had tried it and nobody gave it away, they would just edit it out and not show it...why show it in a show where editing is king, and MB puts in so many details to lead us into the story he is telling?

I really think someone is going to take advantage of this option.... wonder who?

Joan

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 03:43 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I think the new immunity rules would be a lot more interesting if past votes still counted. That would be a reason to give immunity to someone.

For example, Alliance 1 has 4 ppl, only one who has past votes. Alliance 2 has 4 ppl, one with past votes. A member of Alliance 1 gets immunity, gives it to their ally who has votes and Alliance 1 goes in and votes off the member of Alliance 2 who has past votes with no fear of losing one of their own.

Moondance

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 03:44 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I understand what you are saying Spunky... it just makes it more intertesting I think!

I like it! I like it like Car does!

Car54

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 04:09 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
An example of how it could be used is:

Kathy wins immunity... she does not have a solid alliance with any of the 3 groups. She could have given it to Rob and used it to unite N/P/K/S/R into a solid block, if you don't have to tell you are giving it, they could have provoked a tie...
or she could have given it to J/T/R/Z as a way to join their group... it could be a good will gesture..

If Zoe wins, and she is not a risk to Kathy, she could give Kathy, the more vulnerable player, her immunity to prove she is not betraying her... Not to say that there are not repercussions to it. That is why the issue of when you have to tell you are giving it is so important.

If you can bargain in secret, it could be very useful...if you must tell early or in public, then it is much trickier and under the pressure they live in, it will be hard for them to think this through.

Seamonkey

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 09:20 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Well, I think it makes immunity even more of a double-edged sword.. in the past if someone won it too often, they might become a target the first time they lose it. Now some may feel pressure to give away the immunity and be considered in a bad light if they don't.

Mind games.

Llkoolaid

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 10:11 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
<<If Zoe wins, and she is not a risk to Kathy, she could give Kathy, the more vulnerable
player, her immunity to prove she is not betraying her... Not to say that there are not
repercussions to it. That is why the issue of when you have to tell you are giving it is
so important. >>

I think this is the only way it could be used somewhat safely next week. If the winner of immunity next week wants to form a tight 5 person alliance then this offer could be made to Kathy or Vee. I think there are going to be two teams next week with either Kathy or Vee being the swing vote. I think if Vee sees Paschal/Neleh/Sean/and Kathy get tight she might vote with them given some proof of their alliance. I think she was trying to distance herself from Rob more than Sean and will get back with Sean now that Rob is gone. She must be able to see that she can do no better than 5th with John. In fact they all must no they will not get any further than that with John's 4. If they don't do something next week they are going one by one. Kathy,Sean and Vee know it, I wonder if Paschal and Neleh will wake up and realize that if they don't team up they will not get past John's alliance. Surely they can see that he has an alliance of 4.

Llkoolaid

Saturday, April 13, 2002 - 10:14 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
If Zoe wins, and she is not a risk to Kathy, she could give Kathy, the more vulnerable

I left this part out when I was copying and Pasting. Please add it to the first of the above quote. It might make sense then.

Awareinva

Sunday, April 14, 2002 - 03:13 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I think Pappy and Neleh are too much like Gabe...they went into this more for the experience than for the million!! Unless they are really good at hiding their true nature- they don't seem to have the bloodthirsty go for the throat mentality that gets you ahead in this game.

Now if they do get smart and we see the "religious alliance" of P, N, V, S, then it could really be interesting..... I would love for something to happen to change the upcoming Pagonging. But as usual, most of it will be Mark B editing....making us think it "could" happen. That is why we love this show I guess!

Spunky

Tuesday, April 16, 2002 - 11:06 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Okay, I see what you all mean.

Let's say that John wins immunity..who would he give it to?? He is so sure he's the leader, would he give it to the black fella?? Sorry, dont' remember his name, only that he was friend with Rob.. to make him his friend as well?

I apologize, I really can't follow this S4 as I did previous Survivors.