World ending and not enough space in nuclear bunker, who do you keep? Watch

wildrover
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#21
Report 5 years ago
#21
Lawyer, Doctor, Engineer and Soldier
0
quote
reply
Gray Wolf
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#22
Report 5 years ago
#22
(Original post by Olenna Tyrell)
Say the world was about to end and the nuclear bunker you have found only has space for five people (including yourself as the group has already agreed that you should stay for whatever reason). Which four would you keep with you and who would you force to die outside?

Bear in mind that you and the other four will have to survive once you have waited out the disaster that causes the end of the world.

1) Soldier with ten years experience but with a furious and unpredictable temper.

2) Lawyer who is intelligent and gets on well with everyone.

3) Doctor who has previous convictions for sexual assault and has already been accused of sexual harassment by members of the group.

4) Builder with many years of experience but who is elderly and wouldn't survive for too long.

5) Chef who is disabled as (s)he previously lost a leg and needs assistance.

6) Unemployed person with no skills but who is young, healthy and easy to get on with.

7) Priest who is calm and has no negative personality traits.

8) Pharmacist who suffers from a disease and requires constant care.

9) Engineer who is rude, bitter about the circumstances and does not get on with anybody.

Go on the basis of these descriptions.

Basically wanting to see if people put profession/skill over personal factors and vice versa.

1- You need some sort of defence in a post-apocalyptic world
2. You need a doctor, I'll make the soldier keep a close eye on the perv to keep him in line.
4. The elderly man to teach members of the group his trade
9. The engineer who will be kept in line if he becomes too troublesome.
0
quote
reply
Xotol
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#23
Report 5 years ago
#23
3 and 9 are an absolute must. You need a doctor and engineer for this.

I define number 6, so a duplicate of me is unnecessary.

Don't think we need an old builder when we have an engineer. A disabled chef will be troublesome, and we're not exactly going to have time to create gourmet dinners to dine in with the end of the world approaching. Priest is absolutely useless, and, no thanks, I won't need religion here. Pharmacist will be too taxing on the group, and we have the doctor anyway for treatment, and it's unlikely we'll magically have a tub of drugs somewhere in the basement to mix.

Process of elimination leaves 1 and 2.

I hope there's at least one girl there lol.
0
quote
reply
InternetGangster
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#24
Report 5 years ago
#24
1 - soldier
2 - lawyer
3 - doctor
6 - unemployed
0
quote
reply
bembem
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#25
Report 5 years ago
#25
(Original post by arkhamz)
The lawyer - An intelligent person would be useful in establishing objectives such as how to survive in and out of the bunker and would be useful in adapting to dilemmas or problems

The priest- Though I'm not religious, a spiritual figure may be useful in keeping everyone's spirits and morale up, you have to give it to religion for helping people to cope with problems

The chef- assuming everyone is **** at cooking, he would be useful. Sparing a person to help him/her walk may not be that much of a problem. We could also fashion a sort of makeshift crutch for him/her.

Doctor- This person would have essential skills for when we leave the bunker, if he is a dangerous person then I'd assume the group would have to watch him and not keep him alone with females. Also he could be useful in teaching some basic skills to people. I guess when he's finally lost it and harms someone, by that time most would've learnt enough medical training/basic stuff which would make his presence unneeded anymore.


I'd let the rest of them die, especially the soldier and builder. The soldier because I wouldn't want any internal conflicts/strife or power stuggles due to his/her personality. The builder because they would be dead weight.

I'd feel most bad about the unemployed guy and the pharmacist though. I'd maybe let the unemployed guy back in if the doctor goes crazy and has to be removed.

inb4 mean, it's post apocalypse...
Have fun without an engineer.
0
quote
reply
Habsburg
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#26
Report 5 years ago
#26
If we're the only five people left in the world after this catastrophe, I don't imagine we're really in a position to rebuild society or anything. Therefore, I don't think we'll really have great need for those with skills which would otherwise be defined as useful, such as the Doctor and the Engineer, and especially if they are as nasty as described. So that's them rejected. I want to spend the rest of my life where the only other people with me in the world are pleasant and easy to get on with. Thus, I'd choose the Priest, the Lawyer (we'd also need some intelligence - more than anything else, intelligent conversation would prevent us from going insane), and the Young Unemployed Person.

Choosing our fourth companion would be more difficult, however. The Pharmacist, the Chef, and the Builder all seem nice enough. However, their respective diseases, disabilities, and old age would make them liabilities, whatever their somewhat useful skills. Also, I can probably cook end-of-the-world sort of fare perfectly well myself. Do I really need a peg-legged John Torode's opinions on clafoutis? The Builder could be alright, but I'd want someone who lasts a little longer. Once we have waited out the disaster, I assume we would survive by scavenging supermarket foods, farming, hunting, and gathering? None of these invalids would be a great deal of use there, I am sorry to say. The Soldier could be useful for this, but his instability and temper may prove a problem. Perhaps our Priest can help with this? I think I'd have to choose the Soldier, although that's only on balance. If he proves too much of a problem, we could always suffocate him in his sleep, or poison him with foxgloves.

How disabled is this Chef, and how old is this Builder? Do they require constant care like the Pharmacist? I could change my mind...
0
quote
reply
Treeroy
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#27
Report 5 years ago
#27
I'd take the soldier, the lawyer, the doctor and the engineer. The soldier would be someone to lead the group, to get things done. The lawyer and myself are the smart ones, strategically planning how to survive (and I'd also want the lawyer as someone to keep a conversation with). The doctor is there to give aid to those of us who need it; and the engineer is there for our practical needs.

With the exception of the young unemployed person, who might be helpful in raising morale, the rest of them were pretty useless, to be honest. The chef? Well, we don't need a professional in order to eat, and he'd slow us down. The builder is old and fairly worthless, and the priest and pharmacist have nothing at all to contribute.
0
quote
reply
SirMasterKey
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#28
Report 5 years ago
#28
Well even if the genders were split 2/3 then we would be highly unlikely to repopulate the world assuming we were the only survivors.

I wouldn't like to be in the position where I chose either. How can you know that those not selected wouldn't overthrow the others and seize the bunker?

But for purposes of the question:

Lawyer;
Unemployed;
Priest;
builder (they are older and so will have many interesting stories to tell the rest of us).
1
quote
reply
xvFIRESTORMvx
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#29
Report 5 years ago
#29
(Original post by Olenna Tyrell)

1) Soldier with ten years experience but with a furious and unpredictable temper.

2) Lawyer who is intelligent and gets on well with everyone.

3) Doctor who has previous convictions for sexual assault and has already been accused of sexual harassment by members of the group.

4) Builder with many years of experience but who is elderly and wouldn't survive for too long.

5) Chef who is disabled as (s)he previously lost a leg and needs assistance.

6) Unemployed person with no skills but who is young, healthy and easy to get on with.

7) Priest who is calm and has no negative personality traits.

8) Pharmacist who suffers from a disease and requires constant care.

9) Engineer who is rude, bitter about the circumstances and does not get on with anybody.
1 - If the soldier's got quite a bad temper that is unpredictable, then he could lash out at anytime which could prove to be quite damaging to the group in general in terms of morale and also he could physically hurt someone, so he doesn't seem like much use. If this is a post-apocalyptic situation and there is only 5 people you probably aren't going to be able to re-populate the world seeing as nuclear bombs today are way more powerful than what the world saw in WW2, so it's not like you'll be leaving when we consider the really long half lifes of the nuclear material even if you could leave there probably wouldn't be many places to go and you you wouldn't be able to survive outside the bunker without a hazmat suit and an oxygen supply and the suit would also have to have anti-radiation properties as well so we wouldn't really need someone with combat experience, so what good is a soldier with an unpredictable temper? Who knows he could otherwise be a nice guy but I don't think it's worth the potential internal power-struggle that could result from this. Not Someone I would pick.

2 - Even though the lawyer may not be that useful in practical terms, you're probably going to die with the people that you're stuck in the bunker with, so you may as well get on with them at least. Also, if the lawyer is intelligent then this could spark some interesting conversation.

3 - Doctor has been accused in the past, even by some of the people in the group. If the bunker is sealed up well, then people probably won't get sick often, as long as the bunker is fairly clean, so he may not be that useful + it's unlikely that you're gonna have hospital standards of equipment and medicines available, so he may not be of too much use inside the bunker.

4 - If I could pick a 5th person, it would be the builder, not because of his skills, but because if he's old, he might be able to tell some interesting life stories. In practical terms he would be quite useful outside the bunker, but inside he may not be that useful because it's not like you're going to be building a city or anything much, or like you are going to have loads of resources to be doing any building.

5 - Yes, because it would make it less likely for the group to get food poisoning if your food is going to be cooked properly. A bad leg wouldn't be too much of a hassle, it's not like anyone is going to be super busy inside the bunker, so we could take it in turns to help out.

6 - This person would be relateable to me and again it's not like we need anyone particularly skilled in most areas. It's about getting on together because it's unlikely we are going to make it out alive anyways, so you may as well at least be happy for however long you manage to survive.

7 - Having someone calm would be good for morale considering in this situation it's likely that most the people of the world have died and if the priest has no negative personality traits you'll probably get on with them ok. + They could also have some interesting conversations with you, which could help pass the time.


8 - Would be useful if there was an abundance of chemicals and such that they could use to create drugs and stuff, but you probably won't have much of that if any at all in your bunker, so not that useful really.

9 - Not too specific on what kind of engineer he/she is but if they're grumpy that's not good for the group and it's not too likely that you're going to need lots of engineeral type work done in your bunker when SHTF, so I wouldn't take this person in.
0
quote
reply
Sigma44
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#30
Report 5 years ago
#30
(Original post by Olenna Tyrell)
Say the world was about to end and the nuclear bunker you have found only has space for five people (including yourself as the group has already agreed that you should stay for whatever reason). Which four would you keep with you and who would you force to die outside?

Bear in mind that you and the other four will have to survive once you have waited out the disaster that causes the end of the world.

1) Soldier with ten years experience but with a furious and unpredictable temper.

2) Lawyer who is intelligent and gets on well with everyone.

3) Doctor who has previous convictions for sexual assault and has already been accused of sexual harassment by members of the group.

4) Builder with many years of experience but who is elderly and wouldn't survive for too long.

5) Chef who is disabled as (s)he previously lost a leg and needs assistance.

6) Unemployed person with no skills but who is young, healthy and easy to get on with.

7) Priest who is calm and has no negative personality traits.

8) Pharmacist who suffers from a disease and requires constant care.

9) Engineer who is rude, bitter about the circumstances and does not get on with anybody.

Go on the basis of these descriptions.

Basically wanting to see if people put profession/skill over personal factors and vice versa.
Assuming you can cheerfully walk in a ruined supermarket and that there is no alien invasion/zombie infection/i don't know..giant cockroaches? I'll pick the following:

3. Doctor - His medical knowledge and sexual desire is going to be useful in repopulating the world .

4. Builder - His building skills will be crucial in building a strong shelter, one of the most important factor in survival. The ideal situation would be to learn as much as possible from him, and when he does pass away, the group would also conveniently require less food.

7. Priest - In such a grim situation, a priest would be more likely to keep the group's moral up, and also more likely to change and improve everyone's personality.

9. Engineer - His critical thinking and /hopefully/ skills in making tools would assist the long-term survival of the group. Also, as an engineer, he'll be more likely to learn more more from the builder.

Hopefully 1-2 of the above are females (no specific preference), or there'll be a serious re-population issues....lol
0
quote
reply
This Excellency
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#31
Report 5 years ago
#31
(Original post by Olenna Tyrell)
Say the world was about to end and the nuclear bunker you have found only has space for five people (including yourself as the group has already agreed that you should stay for whatever reason). Which four would you keep with you and who would you force to die outside?

Bear in mind that you and the other four will have to survive once you have waited out the disaster that causes the end of the world.

1) Soldier with ten years experience but with a furious and unpredictable temper.

4) Builder with many years of experience but who is elderly and wouldn't survive for too long.

5) Chef who is disabled as (s)he previously lost a leg and needs assistance.



8) Pharmacist who suffers from a disease and requires constant care.



Go on the basis of these descriptions.

Basically wanting to see if people put profession/skill over personal factors and vice versa.

****. I would try and save everyone first, honestly. I'm sure that we could all lie on each other (:sexface: unintended) to make space.

But, for the sake of the thread i'd keep,

2) Lawyer who is intelligent and gets on well with everyone.

3) Doctor who has previous convictions for sexual assault and has already been accused of sexual harassment by members of the group.

6) Unemployed person with no skills but who is young, healthy and easy to get on with.


9) Engineer who is rude, bitter about the circumstances and does not get on with anybody.


Because they would be the most valuable to me after the rest of the world has been destroyed and we need to rebuild and survive for as long as we can.
quote
reply
DK_Tipp
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#32
Report 5 years ago
#32
(Original post by RedArrow)
Soldier, lawyer, unemployed dude, engineer and myself.

Would have taken the doctor. But if his profile is guilty based on sexual harassment (vague). He shouldn't get to live..?

Basically I have a tough man, intelligent man, healthy man and a technical man.

As rude person Im optimistic I can strike a chord with this engineering guy =p


Posted from TSR Mobile
Good luck repopulating the earth.
0
quote
reply
Thetino
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#33
Report 5 years ago
#33
3 4 6 9 but only because you don't state who are female... 6 and myself would learn as much from 4 before he dies of old age... Then focus on learning from 3 and 9 then once we had learnt all they could teach.... I would part ways, as feeding 2 would be easier than 4.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
quote
reply
marcus2001
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#34
Report 5 years ago
#34
Whichever four are women, then I can repopulate the planet with my progeny. If there's only three women then I'd have the priest too as he's least likely to smoke any of my *****es. If there's only two women, then I'd have the priest and the unemployed healthy person who I'd use as food.
1
quote
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#35
Report 5 years ago
#35
Final choices:

Doctor: medical care is important.
Builder: if food runs out, could turn on him for a meal.
Chef: food!
Unemployed person: young and healthy, can easily learn new skills.

Unfortunate sacrifices:
Engineer
Pharmacist

Would never consider:
Priest (good for nothing)
Soldier (counter-productive in this situation due to bad temperament)
0
quote
reply
shahbaz
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#36
Report 5 years ago
#36
Fallout 3 !!!!!
0
quote
reply
RedArrow
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#37
Report 5 years ago
#37
(Original post by felamaslen)
Final choices:

Doctor: medical care is important.
Builder: if food runs out, could turn on him for a meal.
Chef: food!
Unemployed person: young and healthy, can easily learn newskills.

Unfortunate sacrifices:
Engineer
Pharmacist

Would never consider:
Priest (good for nothing)
Soldier (counter-productive in this situation due to bad temperament)
The **** ?



Posted from TSR Mobile
0
quote
reply
Farm_Ecology
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#38
Report 5 years ago
#38
1) The soldier is likely to be a very important member of the group. Being capable, and probably has the most hands on experience with dealing with such a scenario. Previous issues with anger could be a serious deal breaker.

2) The lawyers knowledge is unlikely to be of any relevance. But being able to get on well with the group, and being intelligent is likely to be very useful. No major downsides for him.

3) The doctor is likely the most important member of the group. His knowledge is pretty much a dividing line between survival (assuming he isn't a terrible doctor). His convictions of sexual assault are irrelevant.

4) The builder is completely useless. A liability and would bring nothing to the group.

5) Again, useless. He likely doesn't know much about foraging or finding food, and his single leg makes him a serious liability.

6) Would be able to learn from the others, has no major disadvantages and would likely help later down the line.

7) Doesn't really bring much to the group, or could be helpful depending on age. Something of a safe bet.

8) Knowledge could be helpful, would know what drugs would be needed. His need for care makes him a very serious liability.

9) His knowledge is unlikely to be of much use, and his personality is likely to cause issues.

So, going on all of that, I would say (easily) The soldier, the lawyer, the doctor and the unemployed person.

All members are likely to suffer from unstable issues and behaviors from the end of the world. Both the soldier and the doctor's issue are known, meaning it is easier to keep an eye on them, and deal with any potential issues. Both the lawyer and the employed person would be very useful in keeping the group together, and would be able to learn the trades of both the doctor and the solider. There are no dangerous health issues to worry about, allowing the doctor to concentrate on dealing with any new health issue that might arise. The solider would be able to aid in survival, through at least a basic understanding of what course of action to take, and would be aided by the other three (and me). The lawyer would be able to offer insight, and keep an eye on the solider, while both he and the employed person learn from the doctor and the solider along the way.

The biggest risk is the Soldier. With previous anger issues, there is the risk of him striking out. As a soldier however, he is probably the best equipped at dealing with anger issues that all members would likely face. While the Doctor may eventually sexually assault or rape one of the other members, there is no guarantee this will happen.

All in all, it would be a very solid team. The others that would be left to die would bring nothing to the group, and I think it would be a very easy choice to make.
0
quote
reply
Arbolus
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#39
Report 5 years ago
#39
Soldier, lawyer, doctor and unemployed.

The soldier because when we eventually leave the bunker we're going to be plunged into a dog-eat-dog world. Whether we like it or not, only the strongest and most ruthless are going to survive. We'd need someone with fighting skills and experience in order to have any chance, even if we have to constantly keep an eye on him.

The lawyer because he's intelligent enough to think up solutions to a wide range problems, even though his legal experience is going to have absolutely no relevance in the new world.

The doctor because chances are someone would need urgent medical treatment at some point. When faced with a question of life or death, accusations of sexual harassment are something we have no choice but to ignore.

And the unemployed person because he's young and healthy enough to learn whatever new skills are needed.

As for the others, the builder and the chef are useless - we can do whatever building work we need ourselves, and we have no need for our food to look fancy and presentable - while there's not much the pharmacist can do that the doctor can't. Besides, with their need for constant care they'd only drag the rest of the group down with them.

The priest, like the unemployed person, could potentially learn new skills, but I'd be worried about his beliefs getting in the way of what needs doing. And the engineer might be of use when rebuilding begins, but not in the immediate aftermath of the disaster when we'll be most desperate.
0
quote
reply
AreebWithaHat
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#40
Report 5 years ago
#40
Good thing I chose medicine then, looks like doctor is a common choice even with his questionable history.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?

Yes (78)
30.12%
No - I got the required grades (148)
57.14%
No - I missed the required grades and didn't get in (33)
12.74%

Watched Threads

View All