If you had been Stephen.... (Traitors spoilers)

I honestly don't know what I would do. I would like all the money, but my guilty conscience might kick in.

I can still remember Molly that was brutal.

I was saying that they absolutely must do, every single time the final vote is the decider - that’s not by chance.

I thought Stephen would do what he did as I’m pretty sure he talked about being brought up religious - lying to the faithful as part of the game is one thing but outright betraying your friend that you’ve made a promise to… I just thought something deep down would be like “no pal you’d be off to hell for this”. 😆

I hated seeing Jade get so upset. She really was a pawn in someone else's game. I never thought she stood a chance of getting to the end and winning.

Jack was only there because he was so nondescript. At least faraaz had some smarts. I'd have enjoyed it if faraaz and Jack had stuck to a strategy and won against the traitors.

I would have shared it I think. As I would feel bad, and also you have to take care of your public reputation.

If he took all the money, he would not look good. The traitors has a large audience.

I like to think I'd have had the sense to stiff Rachel and take the winnings for myself. That said, I don't know how much I'd be tied to the strategy played throughout the game and sort of conditioned towards the sense/ fairness in sharing. I don't think she really helped keep him in the game but I did feel she meant it that she wouldn't write his name down. He could have got rid of her much sooner if he'd been more ruthless.

I absolutely think Rachel would have sold Stephen down the river if she'd been in the same position.

It was a good bit of tension to the final. We knew he'd won but was he going to win alone or share.

I wish him all the best. I hope that choosing to opt for a caring sharing "faithful traitor" persona he will get more future TV appearances. Harry (season 2 winner) and Wilf (?) (who didn't even win season 1 right?) Have been characterised as villans. Molly as a gullible victim.

Rachel and Stephen have come out with reputations intact as having integrity.

I could see him as a future light entertainment fashion guru / makeover King.

I loved that they both kept to their promise to NOT stab each other in the back.
I like to think that's how the majority of people would act...but somehow I doubt it.

I would have acted like Stephen. I’m glad he stuck to his promise. I think I wouldn’t have lived with myself especially given Rachel’s story of wanting to help her sick mother. Stephen seemed to have a good job and didn’t seem desperate for the cash. Also I think the public perception of Stephen would have gone down.

Being a Traitor requires you to decieve the Faithful, but there's no requirement to throw your fellow Traitors under the bus. That's a choice, not as some are claiming "the point of the game". In previous series Traitors have chosen to play as individuals but it was interesting watching Rachel and Stephen approach the game a bit differently.
Ultimately, I think Stephen's decision to keep his promise was partly in recognition of the fact that he most likely wouldn't have survived that long without Rachel. She had his back when he was vulnerable due to the thing with Ross in the Library, and the thing with the cages. They both needed each other at different points in the game. Maybe he also didn't want to deal with the social media hate that would inevitably come from turning on Rachel and letting Jack think he'd won the game with a fellow Faithful!

No because Jack was always going to vote for Rachel. In those final three, Jack was guaranteed to get nothing, Stephen was guaranteed to get something, and it was up to Stephen whether Rachel got anything - either vote with Jack, or don’t.

I don’t think they edit the order the the slates are revealed, I think production check the slates and choose the order based on that.

Also, there is a lot in the editing. We are discussing Stephen because he was shown last. He was last to declare (due to editing) on the last three votes.
We would be having a different discussion if they had revealed Rachel's slate last.

I’d have taken all the money - that’s what the game is about! He’s had to lie all the way through so I don’t see the difference at the end.

I would have made the choice Stephen did. I see no evidence that Rachel would have chosen differently. She kept to the promise they made throughout the series and protected Stephen when he was threatened. Rachel didn't even vote for Hugo, the only she voted out was Fiona, entirely understandably in the circumstances. It was only fair that Stephen shared with her, neither would have won without the other.

In series 2 there was no traitor loyalty and Harry played a great game beating everyone, including other traitors. This series they had professed loyalty and I'm glad they kept their word.

Stephen was featured in the programme (can't remember when: last week, week before?) saying that he wanted to act with integrity. He made a promise (that he didn't have to) not to put Rachel's name on the slate, and stuck to it.

The win wasn't all on Rachel, though. She may have invented the strategy to stick together but a lot of the decisions in the turret seemed to have been Stephen's ideas / planning / schemeing.

I agree with this. I thought it made that final episode so fantastic precisely because, as Claudia said, they were 'traitors but completely faithful to each other.' It added such a great dimension.

As other posters have said, I would have done as Stephen did because that loyalty and decency would have been more important to me than the £50k I'd have got by breaking the promise. And he also knew that, had he voted Rachel off, he'd have then had to look Jack in the eye and admit he was a traitor.

And yes it's a game, and yes it's about deceit and cunning and maximising your own chances - but I think most people who go on there are intelligent enough and savvy enough to know it's not just about the game, is it? It's about media exposure, minor fame, future opportunities. Both Stephen and Rachel will do far better out of the Traitors in the longer term than an extra £50k.

For me, the point of Traitors is two fold

One, win all the money
Two, vote Traitors out

That's it really. That's the game as I understand it

However of course, there are nuances.

For example Rachel was brutal. Absolutely focused and imo , if she could have, she would have dumped Stephen and taken all the money. I feel quite clear about that. She is not someone I would trust irl. I didn't get good energy from her and her playing of the game was hard to watch for me

Stephen could have got rid of Rachel on a couple of occasions and might well have then ended up with all the money

He chose not to do that and I'm not 100% sure if it was because of the pact or he didn't have the balls or he simply isn't that sort of person

I am guessing he will make way more than the £47k he lost in media deals and so on. Maybe he was simply not so worried about the money?

The Faithful....least said, really. They were so flip floppy. Even Jack, to a degree, although he was the Faithful i admired the most

Edit - I think Stephen was scared of Rachel

They never show them together after the last person leaves the final firepit scene. In the case of just one winner they show them standing on their own with Claudia outside the castle.

I would have done as Stephen did because I couldn't have sat there on Uncloaked and faced Rachel. He'll get more than £50k off brand deals and featuring fashion brands on his Instagram.off the nice-guy image.

I agree, but Harry played the game quite differently, he was very calculated and ruthless as a Traitor, which isn't the way Stephen played. Stephen was far from stupid and made some shrewd decisions, but also we saw that the whole thing weighed on him a lot more than it did Harry, and his partnership with Rachel was something he actually valued. Harry was always viewing himself as a lone wolf.

No judgement on Harry by the way, I'm just saying he and Stephen took different approaches and are different types of people.

I wouldn't like myself very much if I'd played a pretty good team game with my fellow traitor, who'd helped me get out of scrapes, and who I'd gone a bit full on already to the extent she ended up in a chance situation, if I'd then decided to be greedy and take the lot.

There's far more important things than money, and £50k is already a decent whallop.

To answer your question, I’d have done the same I think. I hope!

I agree with this. It was the game, and he should have taken the money

DH and I have discussed this and we think he’s gained a lot more by maintaining his integrity. People now really like him which will do well for him on social media and in his career. Worth a lot more probably than £50k. £90k is obviously an amazing amount to win but it’s not an amount to retire on.

I hope I would make the same decision as him. Lots of people wouldn't, but it was really lovely to see him stay true to his word to the end. I felt weirdly very proud of him