Per 
Hi!
You've got the start of an interesting idea. I do have a few questions though.
If the baby doesn't really exist, how can the Foundation contain it?
Does the disease make the baby appear to exist when it doesn't? Why? What's the point? Explain the reasoning and the emotions that come with it? What purpose does your anomaly think it is serving?
What perspective are you showing this story from? The Foundation would be the obvious choice here, but you need to show how they interact with your anomaly. If your anomaly is sapient, how does it feel about being contained by the Foundation? How does it communicate its emotions? (Because the people reading your article should also be feeling something)
You have a conflict, but you don't have a conclusion. How is your story going to end? If the Foundation end up containing the disease as well as the consciousness, how does the consciousness feel about this?
Hi!
Potential issues
Test and discovery logs typically serve as an extended description, rather than furthering the narrative. Everything you write in your draft should serve to further the narrative and provide the reader with information they haven't already been told.
How do the Foundation factor into this? How the Foundation interact with the anomaly and its creator is more important than the backstory. (Sidenote: I would actually recommend you write this in a Tale format, because the interactions between the creator and his father are more important than the interactions between the Foundation and the anomaly. Regardless, you need to find a way to convey this story in an emotional way.)
Neutral Stuff
Why are the websites relevant? Why not have the printer be able to copy any antique items? Are there limitations to what the printer can copy (e.g. age-wise?)?
The Good Things!
I really like the story here. You've got a cool anomaly and well-formed characters. I'm slightly concerned that you haven't mapped out your narrative though. What are the major plot points in your story, and how do they connect? You need a conflict*, especially, and a conclusion. What's the most interesting part of the story, and how does it end?
*Conflicts are not inherently negative; they are just barriers your characters face. You may well already have a conflict here, but I would like to see it explained in more detail.
Hi!
If the narrative focuses around the fact that the pen absorbs (?) people's nervous systems, then what's the point in it emptying and refilling at an accelerated rate? If it's just surplus anomalous abilities and it doesn't serve the narrative, take it out.
How is your anomaly contacting people, and what does that have to do with it stealing people's nervous systems?
Speaking of stealing people's nervous systems, if you do decide to take it in that direction, you need to ensure your narrative is different from SCP-570 (especially from its currently-unpublished rewrite) because it's a similar idea.
Remember that how the Foundation interacts with the anomaly is more important than what the anomaly actually does. You've made a superpowered Safe Class object, and it seems like an excuse to lead into Apollyon stuff, when it really doesn't need to be. There's nothing inherently wrong with having a superpowered anomaly, but you need a strong, detailed narrative to back it up. I think if you talk more about the Foundation's reactions here, you might be able to build something.
Reclassifications are fairly common, although they're usually "Euclid Keter", "Keter Euclid", or some form of reclassification to Neutralised. That's not to say you can't include it, it usually just means you have to write two different conproc sections.
Object Class doesn't have anything to do with how dangerous an anomaly is, but rather denotes how easy an anomaly is to contain. There is a thing called Risk Class, which denotes roughly how dangerous an anomaly is, the details of which can be found here.
(Also remember you have 400 words to write your idea. You have used 137 words, and only 58 in your central narrative. I recommend using those words to flesh out your narrative; step-by-step, what happens in your story? Ignore how you think you will format the article, it doesn't matter, focus on the main events and the consequences of those events.)
13:35 <TawnyOwlJones> Pipit_Dealer: You've certainly thought a lot of your anomaly, and you seem to have a backstory, but I can't really see where the Foundation come into this. If they fail to contain your anomaly, what happens in the present-day narrative? (Remember that SCP articles are written by the Foundation in-universe, so even if the information is being
13:36 <TawnyOwlJones> communicated by your anomaly it's all seen in the article through Foundation lenses.)
13:36 <Pipit_Dealer> TawnyOwlJones Like i said, many detail will be included in the final ver but heres the scop:
13:36 <Pipit_Dealer> The SCP have been observing the foundation for quite some time
13:37 <Pipit_Dealer> he surrender to the foundation because the SCP redeem the foundation as a Good Guy
13:38 <Pipit_Dealer> as the Second point, Im on it
13:38 <TawnyOwlJones> you need to include the details of your narrative (or at the very least, the major plot points) in your ideas forum thread, otherwise you'll just keep getting "you don't really have a narrative" kind of crit.
13:39 <Pipit_Dealer> i see
13:39 <TawnyOwlJones> What happens to your anomaly once it surrenders itself to the foundation?
13:39 <Pipit_Dealer> Well he willingly to be contain and be research i.e foundation stuff
13:40 <TawnyOwlJones> okay, and that's the ending?
13:42 <Pipit_Dealer> the ending in my head is spouse to be SCP killed a multiple Class D only using the stories. Due to this, Experiments require Class d who will be tested with SCP-XXXX will need mental evaluation
13:42 <Pipit_Dealer> every personnel*
13:44 <TawnyOwlJones> You haven't previously mentioned this. why would your anomaly surrender itself to the foundation and then kill people? what's the point?
13:46 <Pipit_Dealer> So in my head, The scp didn't have any intent to kill. The reason he surrender himself to the foundation because it knows what his stories can do.
13:46 <TawnyOwlJones> okay, so what do his stories do?
13:47 <Pipit_Dealer> Sorry can you rephrase that? it flew over my head.
13:47 <basircuser> oh i forgot to tell you, TawnyOwlJones, she died of blood loss due to the thorns
13:47 <TawnyOwlJones> basircuser: I understood that, I don't understand why the thorns were in her house
13:48 <Pipit_Dealer> The anomaly stories or Its story?
13:48 <basircuser> aight about to add something to that that explains it
13:48 <TawnyOwlJones> Pipit_Dealer: of course! you said that the foundation "knows what [your anomaly's] stories can do". What do the anomaly's stories do?
13:48 <TawnyOwlJones> basircuser: cool cool :)
13:51 <Pipit_Dealer> The stories can make a human into a "Perfect Man" (A man endless thirst of being a Perfectionist) some will survive but some after 30 seconds after exposure will go insane
13:52 <Pipit_Dealer> The effect can be cured with anthesia
13:56 <TawnyOwlJones> … you need to mention this kind of stuff in your forum thread.
13:56 <TawnyOwlJones> consider: focus your narrative on the stories rather than the automaton. you could even go so far as to write one of the stories in a Tale format, as long as you feature the Foundation (as least in passing).
13:57 <TawnyOwlJones> Regardless of the format, what implications do the stories have on Foundation personnel? What reason does the automaton have to tell the stories? Does it know it's killing people? How does it feel about that? How are we supposed to feel about that when we read the article?
13:57 <TawnyOwlJones> do you mean "amnestics"?
13:58 <Pipit_Dealer> uh "that drug that make you forget" idk how it spells
13:58 <TawnyOwlJones> that's "amnestics" :)
13:58 <Pipit_Dealer> oh
13:58 <TawnyOwlJones> it's okay, i knew what you meant
13:59 <TawnyOwlJones> can you answer the other questions?
13:59 <Pipit_Dealer> Yes i can
13:59 <Pipit_Dealer> so that all?
14:00 <TawnyOwlJones> it depends, that's all the questions I have for now. I'm happy to paste this log on your forum thread and you can answer the questions there, or you can answer them now, or you can spend time thinking about the answers. it's up to you
14:00 <Pipit_Dealer> Ok
14:01 <Pipit_Dealer> Thx a lot man
14:01 <Pipit_Dealer> i know something is wrong but i dont know what
14:01 <TawnyOwlJones> np :)
14:01 <Pipit_Dealer> TawnyOwlJones one more thing:
14:01 <TawnyOwlJones> take your time with it, add all the stuff we spoke about into your original forum thread (mind the word limit!) and the narrative will come to you
14:01 <TawnyOwlJones> go for it
14:03 <Pipit_Dealer> So i could say the Foundation Personnel got first expose to its story and the scientist went bonkers.
14:03 <TawnyOwlJones> if it's part of the narrative, yes
14:03 <Pipit_Dealer> so the backstories can be explain in the form of Interview log?
14:04 <TawnyOwlJones> yes, if you want it to be.
14:05 <Pipit_Dealer> Last one. I have an idea to add a excerpt to add an excerpt from a manuscript discovered by the foundation
14:05 <Pipit_Dealer> making the scp "can be trusted"
14:06 <TawnyOwlJones> "can be trusted"?
14:07 <TawnyOwlJones> it would certainly be interesting to see an excerpt of one of your anomaly's stories, but you've got to make sure it aids the narrative
14:07 <Pipit_Dealer> The manuscript can be in two langguge: First in native (old malay) and the translated ver (Standard english)
14:08 <Pipit_Dealer> What do you think?
14:08 <Pipit_Dealer> about the "can be trusted" i want to say the the foundation redeem it as not hostile towards the foundation
14:09 <TawnyOwlJones> Bearing in mind that this the EN site, I think the Foundation would probably translate it into English in-universe. You might have to ask somebody else about that though.
14:09 <TawnyOwlJones> but does it not still kill people?
14:10 <TawnyOwlJones> if you can find a way to redeem it that is relevant to the narrative, then go for it
14:11 <Pipit_Dealer> It didn't have intend to kill except if being threatend
14:11 <TawnyOwlJones> but do the stories not kill people?
14:12 <Pipit_Dealer> it know the stories can kill but it cant help itself to tell it
14:12 <Pipit_Dealer> because it was build for that
14:13 <TawnyOwlJones> okay, so you need to find a way for it to communicate to the foundation that it shows remorse
14:13 <Pipit_Dealer> Got it
You haven't really answered the questions. The effect on the Foundation isn't really explained beyond saying that the researchers are paranoid. The reason the automaton tells the stories is apparently compulsion, which isn't overly interesting.
I would suggest thinking about all the questions and how the potential answers line up with your planned narrative. You have a sapient anomaly, so it's going to have some sort of reason to be telling the stories. "It does it because it can't control it" may well 1) bore your readers and 2) be a flat narrative (because there's no driving force behind your character).
Hi!
"Monster under the bed is real, actually" is most definitely a trope in fiction. There's nothing inherently wrong with using tropes, they exist for a reason, but it means that you don't have an original idea to fall back on should your narrative fail.
Speaking of narratives, SCP articles are short stories written in the form of scientific reports. This means you need a story.
What are the major plot points in your story? Is your story shown from the perspective of the task force or the child? How does changing the perspective influence the narrative? How does the task force feel about this mission? How does the child feel? What emotions is your reader supposed to be feeling? How are you planning on ending this story?
(Also remember you have 400 words to write your idea. You have used 105 words, and only 34 in your central narrative. SCP articles are short stories and you need a narrative to create a story.)
Hi!
I feel like this ends at the conflict? Like, your conclusion isn't particularly strong, and doesn't really solve the problem. Because your narrative is mainly backstory/discovery log, you don't really have anything going on the present (i.e. following containment). There's nothing inherently wrong with this, but a lot of people don't like long discovery logs that don't show much beyond the point of the anomaly being contained.
I think including something about the symbolism of the broken bundle of sticks (which is not something I, or apparently google, is familiar with) in the story would make it seem significant and would leave your readers with questions. Same goes for showing the child's influence on the skip; you don't inherently need to explain it in full, but you do need to at least mention/imply it if you want people to notice it.
I would suggest PMing a member of the Butterfly Squad and seeing what they say. Good luck!
Hello.
So… you don't really have an idea here. SCP articles aren't just descriptions of things that do things anymore.
How the Foundation interact with the anomaly is really important but you haven't mentioned that beyond hinting at the existence of a backstory.
You have 400 words to write your idea. You have used 31 words, and only 7 in your central narrative. SCP articles are short stories and you need characters and a narrative to make a story.
Some questions to start some brainstorming:
1) Who are your characters? How do they interact with your anomaly?
2) Is your anomaly sapient? If so, how does it feel, knowing that it's hurting people? Does it do it on purpose? By accident? Just in self-defence? How does this detail change the way your characters interact with your anomaly?
3) How are your readers supposed to feel when they read your article?
4) What are the major plot points in your story? Conflict and Conclusion should be your focus here. For example, you say the Foundation are studying your anomaly. What are they studying, and how can you make that information further your narrative?
We spoke about this before in IRC but I thought I'd sum up my thoughts here.
This is an interesting premise, but I do have some concerns. Namely, dinosaurs are not inherently anomalous. If you imply or explain that your anomaly is the process of recreating dinosaurs from fossils rather than the physical dinosaurs themselves, that's would probably fix that issue.
I'm also unsure about how the part about the missing people connects to the story. Are they going missing because the dinosaurs need food, or is it coincidence? Why is whoever made the dinosaurs feeding them people? (Also euoplocephalus and triceratops are herbivores, so they wouldn't eat people or each other.)
In regards to conflict, I presume your discovery is your conflict, but you need to ensure you show the emotions/reactions of your MTF Agents. The Foundation's reactions to anomalies are more important than what the anomaly does.
How is your story going to end? Most of this is probably going to be a discovery log, but you still need a way to tie up the ending in a satisfying way. I can see the ending falling flat because you've got all this cool stuff but then it just sort of… ends?
(Don't blackbox in your forum threads. If the information is hidden here, it's not needed. If it is needed, include it in full.)
Overall, I am interested in this and I don't think I've seen dinosaurs as SCPs before, but you need to ensure you do actually make this into an SCP article.
Hi!
My main concern here is, like, how the Foundation factor into this. If you're writing an SCP article, it is at least shown through the Foundation, if not from their direct perspective. How do the Foundation perceive and interact with this anomaly, and with your character? Why do they allow Tartini to have access to the violin at all?
What's the point of the inclusion of the Devil? Backstory isn't super important in SCP articles in general, but if you're going to include the Devil then you also need to include, like, the reason? What did Tartini do that made his violin cursed?
I feel like ending it with Tartini going insane might cheapen the story? It's a reasonable ending for the situation (i.e. it doesn't just exist for shock horror) but I also worry it might make the ending abrupt. How are you going to portray his insanity in a way that is both respectful and makes an effective ending?
Overall, this is a cool idea, but you need to think in more detail about your other characters (i.e. the Foundation) in terms of narrative progression. Is this story going to be created from Tartini's experience, or is his experience perceived through the Foundation's eyes? If you want to focus on Tartini's emotions rather than his physical actions, a Tale format might work better here, but honestly I think an SCP format written using an etic ("outsider's", i.e. the Foundation, again) perspective would be more interesting. It's up to you.
Hi!
There's a lot going on here.
You've got a spacial anomaly; cool. I'm not convinced with there being multiple people contained inside the anomaly at the same time; it may result in a disjointed narrative because you're telling too many stories at once. Having two characters tell the same story from different perspectives with different emotions is very powerful and adding surplus input might weaken that narrative.
If your main character cannot perceive the other people, the other people are irrelevant to your story. If you tell the story from the perspective of the researcher on the outside, you could mention there being multiple people inside the anomaly, but if it's not going to mean something in your greater narrative then you don't need it.
I actually think test logs are not a good idea here, because they can detract from your main story. They typically serve as extended descriptions of the anomaly, rather than furthering the narrative as they should. Focusing on the limited experience of your two characters is important for both driving your narrative forward and soliciting emotional reactions from your readers.
There's definitely something interesting in a cyclical narrative that gradually becomes both more and less cyclical (depending on perspective). I'd like to see more detail on the actual narrative; what's the memory that your researcher is experiencing and how does it make them feel? (Remember that nostalgia can make people feel lots of different emotions) What emotions are we supposed to be feeling when we read this?
If the process is gradual, how does the researcher inside the anomaly feel about losing their partner and their memories? When you lose large parts of your (long-term) memory it can be extremely distressing*. Do with that what you will.
In regards to short-term memory, the researcher isn't going to have much of that. They're reliving the same memory over and over, and while they might retain whatever the other researcher is saying, most of their short-term memory will be taken up by their physical surroundings. Short-term memory storage only lasts up to about 30 seconds and your narrative may well be stunted if your researcher always forgets what their partner just said. It would be an interesting direction to pull the narrative in nearer the end, but I think gradual long-term memory loss is the way to go initially. I recommend looking up Clive Wearing if you haven't already, and noting the difference in his perception of the world vs that of his family.
Overall, I think this is a fantastic idea. It would work beautifully as both a Tale and an SCP article (I'm leaning more towards Tale because your narrative focuses more on the characters than the anomaly itself, but it's your choice how you format your work), and I'm very excited to see what you do with it.
*(because you're left with massive gaps in your memory and you know something is supposed to be there but there's just… nothing)
Hi!
This is a cool idea but it's not really an SCP yet. SCP articles are short stories in the form of scientific articles, and they need narratives. I would advise against using tests logs, because they generally serve as extended descriptions of the anomaly rather than furthering the narrative. Same goes for discovery logs, interviews, etc.; if it's not aiding your narrative, it's hindering it.
You should think about how your characters (especially the Foundation, if you choose to write an SCP article) come into this. How the Foundation react to the anomaly is usually more important than what the anomaly does.
Who enters the cave and why? What dreams are they having and how does it play into the narrative? What's your conflict here? How does your story end? Death is typically a disatisfying ending, but it's okay to include as long as you write it well.
If you want to include the Oneiroi, I would suggest reading their hub page, along with some SCPs and Tales they've featured in to see how they are characterised, if you haven't already. There's also the option to create a GoI format instead of an SCP article if you want to, which would remove the need to connect the Oneiroi to the Foundation.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi!
You've spent a lot of time explaining what your anomaly does, but you haven't really explained why it matters.
Your anomaly also seems to do a lot of different things but they aren't really connected? If you can connect them and, like, make them all relevant to the story, then it would work but you have to make sure that it's justified. For example, your anomaly cannot pass through liquids. If that's only relevant to your containment procedures, take it out, but if you can write it into the actual story as an event or plot point that happens to your anomaly then it's fine. The same goes for each of your anomaly's abilities.
Your hook is interesting but only because you've created the start of a narrative from it. Choose one of those ways your anomaly could be used, and make a story from it.
Remember that the Foundation has to factor into your narrative (because they're writing the article in-universe). How the Foundation interact with your anomaly is far more important to the story than what your anomaly is or what your anomaly does.
Some questions to start some brainstorming:
1) Who are your characters? How do they interact with your anomaly?
2) How are your readers supposed to feel when they read your article?
3) What are the major plot points in your story? Conflict and Conclusion should be your focus here. What obstacles do your anomaly and/or your characters face that they have to overcome? How do they overcome them? How does your story end?
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say. Good luck!
Hi!
So, I'm kinda torn here. I like the general idea and you've clearly thought a lot about your anomaly's effect on people and how it ties into the story, but I'm mostly wondering about how this ends?
The last paragraph in your central narrative (and the last sentence in the paragraph before) is essentially your containment procedures, which means that in an SCP article format the last thing we read is that people are getting eaten by the shark entity. You could definitely do something interesting with shock horror here, but you may well end up with an abrupt ending (because your story ends at the conflict). That's not inherently bad, it's just something to consider.
My second concern is emotion. Horror skips, and horror writing in general, are designed to scare your readers. You need to ensure that you're focusing on your character's emotions and ensuring that the readers have an emotional connection to the characters before they die.
Bouncing off of that, I don't think focusing on the fact that your anomaly causes phobias to manifest is a particularly good idea. Although I generally recommend that all anomalous abilities are directly connected to the narrative, it may be better to mention off-hand that it's something the anomaly does (or not mention it at all), because you may end up overshadowing the fact that your characters are scared (emotion) by pathologising their fears (phobia). If you're showing their fear through audio/video logs, then it doesn't matter that they didn't used to be scared of heights.
Really recommend finding someone who writes and crits horror skips for this one. It's definitely got potential. Good luck!
Hi!
This is a cool idea but I think you might be overcomplicating it.
With your narrative, it might be easier to focus on one instance of your anomaly and think about their interactions with the Foundation. How the Foundation interact with your anomaly is more important than what the anomaly does. If you were to focus on the chicken, for example, how do the Foundation adapt to having a member of the O5 Council who is a chicken?
Does the anomaly also cause the animal in question to become sapient? If so, how does that change the Foundation's perception of the animal? If not, what are the consequences of having a non-sapient member of the O5 Council (for example)? Does the chicken believe it's part of the O5 Council or is it just a regular chicken?
The main thing to remember here is that you shouldn't let your characters overshadow your narrative.
This has the potential to be a really funny skip but I think you need to rework your central narrative so that it actually tells a story. Alternatively, there's a GoI Format called Wilson's Wildlife Solutions that you could use if you moved your focus from the phenomenon to the actual animal. I suggest checking it out.
If you rewrite this so that you actually have a focused narrative, I'm happy to take another look. Good luck!
Hi!
This is a very cool idea, but I'm wondering about your narrative.
I think maybe you're focusing too much on test logs (which usually serve as extended descriptions of your anomaly, rather than furthering your narrative as they should), rather than the contents of the test logs. What do the test logs tell the reader that they don't already know? How do the Foundation react to and interact with your anomaly?
Basically you need to map this out in a way where it's a structured story, otherwise you risk it becoming disjointed. Detailing the ways in which the Foundation interact with the sentient furniture (as opposed to adding more instances of sentient furniture) will aid your narrative. Essentially, why does your anomaly matter to the Foundation? What can they find out about your anomaly in-universe?
Also remember that your anomaly is not the sentient furniture; there's also an opportunity to focus on the boxes themselves if you so desire.
Think about the major plot points that could exist in your story, especially the conflict and the conclusion. What happens in your story that your characters have to overcome? You mentioned the glitches before, so use them. How can you make your story end in a way that satisfies your readers?
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi! Potentially-harsh crit incoming.
The basic idea is cool but there's a couple of issues here.
Firstly, having an object that just does general anomalous stuff (as opposed to specific anomalous stuff) is usually not very good, because it shows a lack of thought on your part. I suggest choosing a single anomalous effect that your anomaly causes, and making sure you can justify why it does that.
Secondly, your narrative is a story. I don't really care about what potential your anomaly has, I care about what your anomaly does and how your characters (especially the Foundation) interact with it. Like, why does your anomaly matter? What specifically are the Foundation using it for? Why does it need to be kept so secret? Other anomalies are kept secret from GoIs, that's kind of the point, so why is your anomaly any different?
I'm not entirely certain whether this is "canon" on the mainsite, but afaik some GoIs have their own languages too. While they aren't anomalous, information can be as valuable as superpowers. Essentially you need to ensure you're separating this from other "secret languages" and making a story around it that goes beyond "the Foundation have a secret language and the GoIs don't".
If you're including GoIs, I suggest reading their hub pages if you haven't already, as well as some skips and Tales to see how they are characterised through the perspective of the Foundation. I would also recommend not including too many GoIs, as it can result in a disjointed narrative which is overshadowed by your characters.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi!
Original anomalies aren't as important as original narratives. There's two main problems in your thread: 1) you don't really have a narrative and 2) what narrative you have is very disjointed.
SCP articles are short stories. Who are your characters? What are the major plot points in your story? Conflict and Conclusion should be your focus here. The metal cube isn't particularly interesting, and only really serves to overshadow your story. The parasite is your focus here, and it doesn't really matter where it came from. How do the Foundation interact with your anomaly in a way that is interesting to your readers?
Is the parasite sapient? How does it react to the Foundation? Does it know it's hurting people? Does it care?
Death isn't a particularly satisfying ending, especially when your anomaly is just "a thing that kills people". I would suggest thinking about the interactions between the Foundation and your anomaly and mapping out a narrative around it. Also read some Series VI SCPs to see how narratives work in the SCP format.
Some Minor Stuff
You probably shouldn't choose a number yet. "SCP-XXXX" works as a placeholder.
Don't redact or blackbox things in your ideas forum thread. If the information isn't relevant, remove it entirely.
If you make major changes to this thread I'm happy to critique it again.
Hi! Potentially-harsh crit contained within.
The parasite has recorded incidents of reacting to the foundation by specifically targeting books of the higher ups and successfully killing 2 site directors and a member of the 05 council.
Why though? Why is it malicious? What's driving it? (Also it's O5, not 05)
at one point nearly making it to the wanderers library before it was stopped by MTF.
The Wanderers' Library is property of the Serpent's Hand. They are explicitly anti-Foundation; if you want the Foundation to stop SCP-XXXX from destroying the Wanderers' Library, you need a very good reason. There's nothing wrong with writing something where the Foundation and the Serpent's Hand work together, it just requires a lot of knowledge of both organisations and their history together.
You're killing a lot of people here, it seems unnecessary. There's nothing inherently bad about killing people in skips but there has to be a reason and it has to work with your narrative. What you have here is a massively-overpowered thing-that-kills-you, which isn't what the site is looking for anymore.
In regards to, like, XK-Class scenarios, I would recommend not doing that for your first skip. As I said above, it can easily turn into "my skip is the most powerful it killed all these people" rather than an attempt to actually write a story. Writing Apollyon/world-ending skips tends to turn into that too; it's more than often completely unnecessary.
When including GoIs in your SCPs, you need to read their hub pages, along with a bunch of their GoI formats and SCPs and Tales that they feature in so you can characterise them correctly.
(like scp-5000) but i'm not too sure yet
You probably should not be trying to mimic a thousand-slot skip written by an extremely prolific and experienced author for your first skip. Tone it down. Additionally, not knowing where your story is going to lead is okay, but you do need to figure it out. That's what ideas critique is for. Do some brainstorming and pick whichever ending you think will work best with the overall tone of your narrative.
On top of all this ^^^, you still don't really have a narrative. You've created a faint outline of one, I'll give you that, but you've focused too much on making your SCP massively-overpowered and not enough on the actual story.
Try to think about what reason your parasite has to kill people, and how the Foundation, like, adjust??? to that. Does SCP-XXXX need to maintain contact with books, or does it just want to? i.e. can the Foundation lock it in a box and leave it there, problem solved, or is there more to it?
Overall, tone it down. Stop trying to overcomplicate your narrative with multiple GoIs and XK-Class scenarios, and think of a different story involving the same anomaly.
I can't tell you not to write this story, and you absolutely can write it and post it to the mainsite if you want to, and you're more than welcome to talk to other critters (you should talk to other critters), but the bottom line is that you still don't have a narrative. Take some time away to read a bunch more Series VI skips and reconfigure your storyline, and then I'm happy to look at it again.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say. Good luck!
Hi!
This is a very cool idea. You definitely need to refine the narrative, but there is a fairly-coherent outline here.
SCP articles typically follow specific characters. Who are your characters? Who is infected? How do infected characters respond to the Foundation? You say you're going to use an interview; what happens in the interview and/or what do your readers find out in the interview that they don't already know? (I'm thinking that the interview is how the Foundation find out the song is contagious, but that's up to you to decide.)
Test logs usually function as extended descriptions of the anomaly, rather than furthering the narrative. Sometimes they can be successfully used to show how anomalies adapt to different conditions, but I don't really see them being beneficial to your story (unless you can explain how you would use them).
I would suggest scaling your anomaly down. Apollyon Class entities can often be labelled Keter, and world-ending entities in general can very easily fall into cliches. If you do want to mention it that the Foundation are treating it as a potentially-world-ending entity, that's possible, but I wouldn't make it Apollyon or world-ending because it doesn't need to be.
There's lots of directions you can take this in in terms of tone, so think about how you want your readers to feel when they read your work and superimpose that onto your characters, at least to begin with.
The solution to your anomaly (in addition to your actual anomaly) has the potential to be terrifying, if you want it to, but you have to make it specific rather than general. Whose tongue is getting cut out? How do they feel about it? Are they relieved? Or not?
How does your story end? What happens to your characters that will cause your readers to leave feeling the way you want them to?
This SCP is contained i believe? There's still many things we don't know about it, like how we can still think and write and have consciousness but sing the lyrics to a song at the same time. Does it hypnotize or use telekinetic powers to mind control people? or are people just pulling a prank because they want to relive their childhood.
This isn't particularly important. It doesn't really matter why your anomaly does what it does, because your focus is on your characters and the effect of the anomaly. The prank would be a way to write a -EX, but it would likely make your skip anticlimactic.
people who are infected have the option to stay and live their lives without a tongue or start a brand new life as a new person also without a tongue.
Would amnestics not work as an alternative? If not, why not? (If the reason affected people don't stop singing is nostalgia, Class E amnestics are anti-nostalgia drugs. Utilise that or don't, but consider there's lots of things to think about here.) Why are your characters given a choice?
I hope that helps. I am genuinely interested in seeing what you come up with here. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi!
Tell me about your researcher. What is he doing throughout your story? How does his presence/existence drive your narrative forward?
SCP articles are typically standalone. They can tie into canons, or into their own series (like Tale series are a thing), but they have to be stories in and of themselves. Nobody should be required to read multiple articles to reach a conclusion for one overarching narrative, like how each book in a real life novel series could serve as the ending to that series.
You can absolutely use a single article to introduce a character, you don't need to show their entire life-story, and you can use them in your other articles but that first article shouldn't serve just to introduce your character; it should tell a story and end in a satisfying way, same as any other skip.
If your tone is "wholesome and lighthearted" rather than "dark and scary", I'm unsure about the tongue thing. It just seems out of place in an article with a lighter tone? You could pass it off as something where the end justifies the means, but it's not quite as relevant to your narrative anymore.
Euclid is whatever. I think actually your anomaly would be Keter, but object class is usually decided last, based on what you write in the draft phase. Regardless, if your anomaly is taking over the world, what are the implications of that? How do the Foundation react to learning that information?
I'm unsure as to how you're planning on making the tone lighthearted or wholesome? If you could go into more detail about that, that would be great.
How does reading the article through your researcher's eyes change the way your reader will perceive the article? You've sort of explained how he's characterised, but you still haven't explained what he does. What are the contents of the interview? What is he trying to find out about your anomaly?
You need some form of tone in your article, because your article is a story. Without consistent tone, your story won't go anywhere and your readers won't feel anything. Tone is just the general vibe of the article, whatever emotions you want your readers to experience is superimposed onto your characters. You can change the tone as the article progresses, but you need to know what emotions you're trying to convey.
You don't need to go into major detail about the tongue thing if you don't want to, but you do need to mention it if it's part of your story (specifically, it should be in your containment procedures). It doesn't have to be dark, but it does have to be consistent with the overall tone of your article.
If you're going to have the object class as "Euclid Keter", you need to explain why the reclassification was necessary in your article; because any reclassification means something happened in-universe, which is part of your narrative.
How does Dr Vannia react to losing the ability to speak? How does he communicate? Was he infected during a containment breach or before initial containment or during testing? Does he lose his tongue in the article, or before it?
I'm not convinced by the ending. It just seems disjointed and out of place compared to the rest of the article. It kind of reminds me of the ending of "Bird Box" by Josh Malerman (the book, not the film). The tone you're going for the ending here is very different to that of Bird Box, but the principles are similar (i.e. there's a place where a specific group of characters end up, and it's implied they stay there forever). The difference is that here it seems to be a random thing that's been tacked on as an ending, rather than the logical conclusion to the story. There's nothing inherently wrong with having this as your ending, especially if Dr Vannia also ends up there, but you need to make sure that it actually connects to the rest of your narrative.
Hi!
I really like this idea! You're correct in saying that it's a solid concept, and that the narrative needs work.
You need to make sure that each of the miners are different characters who behave and react in different ways, have different emotions, etc. You also need to make sure that each of the miners tell different stories; they need to be connected (e.g. through similar working conditions) but distinct (so that your readers are learning things significant to the narrative they didn't know before as the narrative progresses). The story should head towards a conclusion with every additional piece of information, so consider the ending before anything else.
What are the implications of the tunnels connecting to each other? You've explained the reason but not the result. Why is it relevant to your narrative that the mines connect? Is it not scarier to be alone?
Insanity is typically dissatisfying unless you follow it through. "Thing that kills you and/or makes you crazy" is overplayed, but if it's relevant to how your characters interact with and react to the Foundation then it's okay to keep it, as long as you're respectful about it.
I'm unsure about how you're planning on ending your story? When your narrative focuses on exploration (both physical and metaphorical), it can very hard to cut off in one place or bring to an ending. I suggest mapping out your narrative in pieces (set up, build up, conflict, conclusion) and moving it around to make a solid narrative. Brainstorming all the possible directions this story could take would probably help a lot, especially with the conclusion.
I hope that helps! Feel free to reply here or send me a .tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
15:35 <TawnyOwlJones> hi!
15:36 <TawnyOwlJones> so, you've written a draft?
15:36 <Weloo> Yeah and I doubt it's "Good enough"
15:36 <Weloo> which is why I should've not immediately went for a draft and instead made an idea critique thread in the forums
15:36 <TawnyOwlJones> first drafts always have flaws. can you post your sandbox?
15:36 <Weloo> Alright
15:36 <Weloo> http://scp-sandbox-3.wikidot.com/an-idea-seeking-critique
An idea - SCP Sandbox III
15:37 <TawnyOwlJones> bear in mind i'm not critting your draft here, i'm trying to help you refine your idea for your forum thread
15:37 <Weloo> Yes, I understand
15:37 <TawnyOwlJones> awesome
15:38 <TawnyOwlJones> can you summarise your article in one sentence?
15:39 <Weloo> An Idea, concept for a new unnamed SCP (also number not decided)
15:40 <TawnyOwlJones> nope, your draft. what is your draft about? or, what are the most important parts of your draft? (I have read it, but you summarising it is the first step to creating your elevator pitch in your forum thread)
15:41 <Weloo> oh
15:42 <Weloo> Dang, is this is really where my mind suddenly goes blank
15:42 <TawnyOwlJones> that's okay
15:43 <TawnyOwlJones> so, from what i can see, you've got a shapeshifting humanoid entity that does ~things~
15:44 <TawnyOwlJones> what I don't see, is the point
15:44 <Weloo> Simply, yeah
15:44 <Weloo> The point of the SCP's existence or the point of why I "made" it?
15:44 <TawnyOwlJones> scp articles are short stories in the form of scientific articles. the central narrative section is a fairly detailed description of the main plot points in your story
15:44 <Weloo> Oh.
15:45 <TawnyOwlJones> the point of its existence; i'm not dragging you
15:45 <TawnyOwlJones> essentially, you're writing a story based around a anomaly and its interactions with the foundation
15:46 <TawnyOwlJones> how are the foundation affected by your anomaly? how do they react to it?
15:46 <TawnyOwlJones> have you read "How to Write an SCP"?
15:47 <Weloo> I have but I basically did everything in my mind so I didn't have "preparations" nor did I think about how it would affect the "story" it exists in
15:48 <Weloo> I think I'll try and make a story around it
15:48 <TawnyOwlJones> okay, so what story does it exist in?
15:49 <TawnyOwlJones> you have 400 words to write the last four sections of your forum thread. if you don't have a narrative in the forums, you'll probably get crit along the lines of "you don't really have a narrative; here's some questions to start you off". if you do have a narrative, you'll get crit on how to develop it.
15:50 <TawnyOwlJones> no idea is perfect initally, but you should go onto the forums with at least some idea of the story you want to write
15:50 <Weloo> I see. thank you.
15:51 <TawnyOwlJones> of course
15:51 <TawnyOwlJones> would you like some brainstorming questions?
15:51 <Weloo> As of right now, I'm writing a story around my conceptual SCP, lol
15:51 <TawnyOwlJones> rephrase?
15:51 <Weloo> uhh
15:52 <TawnyOwlJones> is this the same scp we're talking about rn?
15:52 <Weloo> yep, I'm writing a lore behind it and it's affiliation with the SCP, like how it was discovered, secured, before it was "captured and contained"
15:53 <Weloo> Then maybe I could have more context for myself to present it better
15:53 <TawnyOwlJones> narrative is "present-day" narrative. knowing backstory is maybe important, but it likely won't feature much in your article
15:53 <Weloo> it's affiliation/interaction with the SCP foundation*
15:53 <Weloo> Alirght.
15:54 <Weloo> Sorry, It's getting kind of late for me over here so I'm really tired, lol
15:54 <TawnyOwlJones> yes, how it interacts with the foundation
15:54 <TawnyOwlJones> that's okay! i would recommend sleeping before you keep trying to write things
15:54 <TawnyOwlJones> come back to it tomorrow, the mainsite will still be here
15:55 <Weloo> I think I'll come up of a general idea and then I'll get some sleep, thanks a lot for the help :D
15:55 <TawnyOwlJones> no problem! glad i could be of assistance :)
15:55 <Weloo> o/
15:56 <TawnyOwlJones> o/
Hi!
I would really suggest cutting out the extremely-specific stuff here, even if it just makes your pitch more simple. You'll also have more words left to refine your narrative. (And don't blackbox things in your forum thread; remove them entirely if they aren't relevant.)
Your idea is fairly interesting, but there's also a lot of stuff happening.
Compulsion (i.e. when your anomaly makes your characters do stuff) isn't a particularly strong drive for your narrative, and it isn't interesting either. If you use it, it has to make sense and be written well. It may well be easier for you and better for your narrative to come up with a reason as to why your characters feel a need to attack people when in the presence of your anomaly.
Your anomaly in itself seems overcomplicated for no reason; you mention trance-states in your elevator pitch, but they don't feature at all in your narrative. Same goes for the earthquake. If an anomalous effect isn't relevant to your narrative, take it out. if it is relevant, make it so.
Essentially, you need to ensure that the things your anomaly does line up with what actually happens in the story, and also that it doesn't do too many things (and if it does multiple things. that they make sense together).
You can describe a situation in which a character tried to stab someone because they were affected by your anomaly, there's no inherent problem with that. It could end up being cliche, but, as long as the story is well-written and it makes sense in the context, it's fine. What you shouldn't do is write that the anomaly causes people to experience "rage states" and then not show that in relation to a character.
Like, I don't really care what your anomaly does. I do care what your characters do, and especially how the Foundation interact with your anomaly. Remember that the Foundation are writing your article in-universe. How do they perceive your anomaly?
The discovery, specifically the part about the earthquake, doesn't really sit right, it doesn't feel relevant; I would advise not including discovery logs where the discovery doesn't impact your narrative. The part where the police officer gets stabbed is relevant, so focus on that (the event) rather than the location.
How are you planning on ending your article?
Overall, I really like the idea. I think you need to make sure you detail the things the anomaly does and how it affects your characters and how your characters and the Foundation react to your anomaly and its effects. Refine the narrative and make it linear and you'll have something really solid here.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi!
You haven't really changed much, beyond describing your anomaly more. Like I said previously, it doesn't really matter what the anomaly is or what it does; the Foundation's reaction/interaction is more important. Additionally, what narrative you could create from what you currently have would be extremely disjointed, because the events where your anomaly is present are all separate, rather than one continuous storyline. What are the main plot points in your story? Conflict and Conclusion are the most important.
The Foundation aren't really involved in your article at all, beyond containing the anomaly.
You mention test logs (or "testing", at least), but you don't explain what happens in those tests or what the Foundation is testing. Bear in mind test logs usually serve as extended descriptions of the anomaly rather than furthering the narrative as they should. They can be used successfully when testing one anomaly in different conditions, or testing variables in a separate part of an anomaly, but they still need to drive the narrative forward.
Feel free to reply here when you've thought of a vaguely-coherent storyline; I'm more than happy to keep critiquing your idea, despite being potentially harsh above. Good luck!
You can get access to the sandbox by going to #site17 in the IRC chat and asking staff for an invite.
Test logs don't work unless they further the narrative. Why are you crosstesting with those skips in particular? What do the test results tell us about your skip that we don't already know?
Read some Series V and VI articles. Actually, read a lot of Series V and VI articles. There's nothing inherently wrong with crosslinking or crosstesting with Series I but if you've never read anything else you won't get your tone/narrative correct in your article.
Generally, don't blackbox things. http://www.scpwiki.com/avoid-the-blackbox
Object Classes do not denote how dangerous an object is, just how difficult it is to contain. Your object is probably Safe Class, or some sort of esoteric class at a stretch; It's not Euclid. There's another thing called Risk Class, which is part of the ACS, which kind of denotes how "dangerous" an anomaly is. http://www.scpwiki.com/anomaly-classification-system-guide
As for your actual narrative, why the reclassification to Thaumiel? You could reclassify it to Thaumiel, have the Foundation try to use it for something, have that something go terribly wrong, and then classify it back to Safe. That's a kind of boring, quite cliche, bordering-on-making-the-Foundation-seem-incompetent scenario I thought up in about 10 seconds, but it is a complete narrative arc. Play around and see what you can make of it.
Link your sandbox here when you've figured out a narrative and I'll take another look.
Hi! (Summoned via IRC)
Format
If you're focusing on the anomaly's emotions from the perspective of the anomaly rather than focusing on how the Foundation perceive/interact with the anomaly, then a Tale format may well be an easier way to convey this. If you're focusing on the moral dilemma, then an SCP format is perfect. Remember that the Foundation is writing this document in-universe, so in an SCP article everything is filtered through their perspective to an extent.
Narrative
What is the significance of the anomaly being a squid (or at least squid-shaped)? How do the Foundation react to it looking like a squid? I don't just mean initially, I mean emotionally over time.
What is the history? What story is your anomaly telling here, and why is it important? Is it important, or is it a distraction? How does it influence the Foundation's moral dilemma? Do different characters pick up different parts of the story and use them in their arguments?
What conclusion do the Foundation come to, and why/how? What do they do about their decision? How are your readers supposed to feel about the ending?
Overall
Overall, I really like this idea and it's pretty clear you've thought a lot about it. I'd like to know more about the details (i.e. what the story will actually consist of, and a basic outline of the major plot points (although it's basically set up fine already)), and specifically about the conclusion.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
I don't think the history is particularly interesting. Like, it seems kind of generic? That being said, it is a complete narrative in itself and could easily be used to elicit emotion in one way or another. In terms of ideas critique, there's nothing much to say about the history itself, it's a solid backstory.
Plot points look good. You said in your initial post that the Foundation contained the squid for 10 years before their moral dilemma began. Are you planning on keeping that?
The plea is a nice touch, and I love the idea of having multiple endings. You could do it by using a collapsible for each ending and the reader can choose which one to open. You could also use supplement pages (and include the links in the O5 voting table, which might be cleaner than having random collapsibles) but that requires multiple uploads and I believe it also takes up multiple spaces in .lc, so it may not be preferable.
Hi!
The history is itself is not part of your core narratvie, really, and is therefore something you can consider in the draft stage.
I'm glad you're keeping the time distance, it makes more sense, I think, than just killing the squid instantly.
The hardest part about the multiple endings would be having to write them all. The actual formatting/code stuff is not particularly difficult. It's up to you what you do when you're writing.
Have a greenlight! I'm super excited to see what you make out of this! :)
Hi! (Summoned via PM)
You haven't expanded on the narrative since Impperatrix and
Zoobeeny critted it. There's still no story here.
You need to explain what the anomaly does in relation to the Foundation, and, like, how the Foundation react to that. Right now you've got an alien anomaly with superpowers, but it doesn't do anything.
What happens in your article after the Foundation contains your anomaly? How does it interact with the Foundation? What are your major plot points? What's the general tone of the article? What emotions are we supposed to feel? Etc etc etc.
Summoned via PM for a second look; hoping this isn't double-posting.
My first question here is, like, "what actually is your anomaly?" Is it the sarcophagus? How does your anomaly tie in with the missing people? Or is that an extraneous detail that doesn't actually lead to anything beyond the discovery of your anomaly?
If there's an unknown force affecting your anomaly, is that not the SCP? Or are the incidents actually the reactions rather than the cracks themselves?
If you're making your anomaly a prison, we should know what it contains. It would give the Foundation an incentive to keep repairing the anomaly (because if they know it's a world-ending entity imprisoned inside your anomaly they may well be inclined to keep it there).
There's definitely something here, but at the moment I'm not really interested. The Foundation are acting as a passive force and that means stuff is happening and they're watching it rather than them being actively involved in the containment and maintanence of your anomaly.
In regards to, like, XK-Class scenerios and Apollyon objects, it's very easy to fall into cliches. I would normally recommend against it entirely (especially for your first article) but you do have some sort of a narrative here. "Everyone dies" is very hard to write well, and will often result in an unsatisfying ending. Cliffhangers, too, are hard to write into SCP articles regardless of whether you intend to extend the storyline because it is often an excuse to leave a story without a conclusion. "Anomaly destroys the world" can be a conclusion, but you have to be very careful with it.
Overall, your narrative is existent, but it still needs work. You should consider the tone of your article here especially; what emotions do your characters feel and how do they manifest in your readers?
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a Wikidot PM or a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi!
I have two main concerns here.
The first is that the Foundation don't really factor into this. SCP articles are shown from the perspective of the Foundation and they should feature in some way, even when using format screws. You have to show how the Foundation interacts with and perceives your anomaly.
A way to bypass this entirely would be to write a Tale instead. You have a fairly solid backstory set up here which is the main focus of your narrative (as opposed to the events which occur when SCP-XXXX is in containment). That's not to say your anomaly can't be contained by the Foundation, it can be. A Tale format would allow you to tell the story through your anomaly, rather than through the Foundation. It's a totally different emotional scope, and something to consider.
My other concern is that, regardless of format, I'm unsure as to how you are going to tell both the backstory and the incident that occurs in containment without it seeming disjointed.
We don't really get to see much into your anomaly's abilities beyond the incident; it doesn't seem to be part of the same story. The incident in itself provides an emotional link, but it's barely connected to the rest of the story. That being said, it's not a bad conclusion, it's just in the wrong place.
Are you planning on drawing this, rather than writing it? Drawing it may well provide a solution to the problem of not seeing your anomaly utilising its abilities. If you want to write it, you need to make sure you fill the gap between your anomaly crashing into the moon and your anomaly drawing its planet in containment.
Summoned (via PM!)
fairydoctor is right that you have your central narrative in your hook/attention grabber section. It doesn't really matter, but editing it so it's in the right place might stop more reviewers from mentioning it.
My main issue with this concept is that it's kind of all over the place. You mention that it's an ice dispensing machine, but then you say there's a person in it and an observation deck. Is it a spacial anomaly, or is it just really big? Unless you mean that the researcher is trapped in the containment cell; in which case, cool, I guess.
What are the implications of your anomaly being able to cause the Ice Age? Is it sentient/sapient, or does it just activate at random?
Like, you have a narrative here but I don't really understand what your readers are supposed to feel from it. It kinda has Series I vibes at the moment. More detail and explanation of what emotions your characters are feeling, and, like, how the Foundation react to seeing the video would fix that.
warning from a previous universe
What's the warning? How do the Foundation react to it? Do the Foundation know your anomaly caused an Ice Age? How do they react to that? Etc etc etc.
Overall, I like the idea, but it's still just an outline. Rearranging your narrative so that you show the Foundation's reactions and responses to the anomalous effects, as well as showing what emotions your characters are feeling (and your readers are supposed to feel) would flesh it out more.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me another Wikidot PM or a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi!
Addressing your page layout
Themes are often tied to canons or GoIs. Making your own theme requires a decent knowledge of CSS and you would have to get it tech-approved before you could use it. Unless you have a really solid reason to make your own theme for this article, I don't recommend it. Using the standard theme is not inferior, and there's also a couple of different CSS/BHL themes you can use without having to tie your article to a canon or GoI if you really hate the standard theme.
Addressing your narrative
Moths are absolutely not "trash versions of butterflies". Projecting inherent moral value onto animals (or people) based on their appearance is not good. You can have an anomalous moth with low self-esteem, but you shouldn't be making blanket statements about entire groups of animals.
I don't actually understand what your story is. You've got a pocket dimension with an evil moth in it but you don't explain why.
How do the Foundation factor into your story? Who are your characters? How do your characters interact with the pocket dimension and with the moth? The moth is presumably sentient, so what emotions is it feeling, and what emotions are your readers supposed to feel? What's your conflict? How does your story end? What's the narrative arc here, and what do your readers learn from it? Etc etc.
Addressing your additional notes
Nobody is going to greenlight you if you don't have a narrative. You should ideally have figured out a narrative before engaging in ideas critique and very definitely have one by the time you get to drafting. Greenlighting and ideas crit aren't barriers to jump over, they're processes to make your ideas better and more fleshed-out so that you don't spend ages drafting only to have it flop on the mainsite because your concept wasn't solid enough.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a tell in #thecritters if you have more to say.
Hi!
There is a massive difference between 10k words and 20k words. If you don't know how long your draft will be, you don't need to state it. Tales are typically longer than SCP articles but 20k is huge. The longest on-site draft I've ever seen was 17.5k but it had a lot more happening than one continued interaction between two characters.
I have concerns about X-Man Syndrome with this but my main problem is that your story doesn't really lead anywhere. Like, we know why your anomaly is being tortured but that's the entire story.
Do the cult ever reach their goal? What are the consequences if they do? If they don't, how do they react? What happens beyond your character getting needlessly tortured? What happens to your character in the end? Does the Foundation interject? Why/why not?
How is your anomaly characterised? Who is she? What are her goals? Etc etc.
How does the cult leader's cognitohazard ability come into your story? What actually is the ability? I don't know much about cognitohazards/memetics but it doesn't seem to fit in here.
What emotions are your characters feeling and how is that projected onto how your readers are supposed to feel?
Your story is a slight twist on "thing that makes you go crazy". It's just not interesting at the moment. Try mapping out the events that take place in your story and how your characters react to them.
Good luck!
Summoned (via PM!) Sorry for the delay; I've had a lot of IRL stuff going on.
I'm getting to the point where I'm torn on this.
Your narrative is present. It might be a little disjointed in places, but you've mapped it out fairly well. You've still got to be careful with X-Man Syndrome, but you've got a character with a personality and if the focus is on the cult and their motives then it's barely an issue.
I think the main problem here is that it's on a much bigger scale than I enjoy reading. I'm generally not a fan of Apollyon stuff or 001s or thousand slots or long Tales that are heavy on the metaphysical lore. It's just not my thing.
That being said, it's clear you've made a lot of progress from where you were before. I'm pretty happy to greenlight you, but I highly recommend you seek out a critter who enjoys complicated, big picture, cult-y stuff more than I do.
I would also recommend using a spellchecker, and, like, googling idioms before you use them. Having good SPaG is generally a requirement if you want to do well on the site, and while reviewers can and will line-by-line crit the SPaG in your draft it's generally better to do it yourself first.
I hope that helps, and I wish you the absolute best of luck.
Hi!
You actually seem to have the start of a backstory (which is part of your central narrative) in your hook section; you just need to explain it in more depth.
Essentially, your narrative is just the things that happen in your story. What are your characters doing, and what emotions are they feeling? Like, start with how they react to being resurrected as catboys, then how they react to and interact with the Foundation.
You need a set up, a build up, a conflict, and a conclusion. You have drafts, so read your drafts, work out which storylines you want to keep, and pull them into one storyline.
Specifically, what happens in your characters' pasts? What is their relationship like in the past vs the present? How do the Foundation interact with your characters? You do need to tell more than a backstory, but you've already mentioned your characters' interactions with each other in containment; that's a narrative (or part of one, anyways). If you can explain all that here, then you'll get more substantial critique.
Remember that SCP articles are told from the Foundation's perspective. The Foundation views anomalies as objects, but that doesn't mean they can't be developed characters. (Especially since you mentioned in the IRC that they're contained together; why was that decision made and how does it further your narrative?)
I'm also slightly concerned that you might be basing this too much on the source material. I haven't seen Mozart L'opera Rock but I'm wondering how much of your backstory is taken from the musical. You may well encounter issues where readers can't understand your story without understanding where it comes from, and with an obscure source material that's probably not a good thing.
"18th Century composers get reincarnated as catboys" is a good idea. There's nothing wrong with it, as long as you write a story around it. Honestly, I think leaning away from the fanfiction (MLR) angle and making it your own story instead would be a better way to go about writing this.
Lay out your plot points here or message me in the IRC and I'm happy to take another look. Good luck!
Hi!
I'm still figuring a lot of stuff, especially in the direction of the story, so I'm kinda a bit scatterbrained at the moment. I keep making up new ideas and end up writing them if my brain likes it way too much, so I would still need to filter out some drafts here and there (and hopefully reduce the amount of random tidbits that were written on a whim)
There's nothing wrong with writing excess (i.e. stuff you don't plan to include in your current skip) about your own characters, but I would urge you to separate it from your current skip (e.g. by creating a different sandbox) because if you're trying to connect separate parts together rather than drawing lines to separate one whole story into plot plots you might end up with a very disjointed narrative. It's also testiment to the fact that you need to think more about what your specific plot points are; you can add/remove stuff in drafting, but if you have no idea what direction your story is going in then that's an issue.
I might figure out how their relationship differs from back then when they were musicians in 1780s Vienna compared to when they somehow ended up in the Foundation after more than 200 years.
How does their relationship differ? How does that affect their interactions with each other and with the Foundation? How does the Foundation's perception of your characters change?
I still need to somehow piece together how the rumour affected them, specifically one of the scips, greatly back then
This is your conflict!
How was the Foundation able to resolve the issues of "scip constantly blaming itself and being so emo about a murder that it didn't commit" and also "scip being very annoying on the site and keep breaking out just to see its friend who is also contained"
This is your conclusion!
Okay, so, I have an idea. Write this skip as an introduction to your characters. Reference how Celeri and Mozzarella are both contained separately from each other, bring up the rumour in an interview or whatever and have them react to it, show that they are reacting in very different, both problematic, ways, and then resolve it by containing them together.
That's a narrative, or the outline of one anyway, and that's what I think you're trying to write except you're also going too far and chaotic because you have like 50,000 drafts. You obviously don't have to stick rigidly to this outline I thought up in about 10 seconds if you don't want to (you are also welcome to), but it acts as an example of how to explain the outline of your narrative to reviewers. And then you add in the stuff about your catboys being chaotic emo dudes based on 18th Century musicians. I would 110% greenlight that.
Essentially, the problem here isn't the idea, it's how you're explaining it. Other reviewers may not want to look at your draft, or see the context from the IRC, so you need to be able to explain it in a clear and concise way. I will greenlight you if you explain your narrative in a coherent way.
I hope that helps!
Hi!
I tend to pair up stories that revolve around the same idea, despite it being mismatched and kinda disorganized (tho it follows some sort of timeline? idk). My drafts does look like a total nightmare and my brain making up spontaneous ideas is making it worse and ends up with me hording a bunch of ideas that stray away from the main plotline, so I have to find some way to reduce the amount of random tidbits to make my drafts a bit tidier.
The problem here isn't the writing or the disorganisation; it's that you're writing things outside of the narrative scope for this piece of work in the same area as this piece of work. You can use a different sandbox, or a tab for this draft and a tab for your other writings (probably use collapsibles, it keeps it tidy), or something else entirely, but keeping them together will increase the disorganisation and make it harder to write this current draft. Essentially you need to decide what story you are writing this time and stick to it. Don't overcomplicate the narrative by trying to fit something you wrote into your narrative that you like, even though it doesn't quite fit into this particular story. You can always write more mainsite works if you feel like writing other things that happen to your characters.
How their relationship differs is I read that the peeps Mozzarella and Celeri are based on is that they had a professional rivalry…
This entire section is good. It's pretty clear you've done your research.
Considering the fact that they're a pain in the ass, I had an idea that the staff aren't that able to tolerate them, especially Mozzarella…
This section is also okay. I'm really just thinking here about how you plan to show that they're a pain in the ass? I'm also wondering as to whether it's particularly relevant to this particular storyline? (See the point below about the narrative plot points)
As I've mentioned, they're probably a pain in the ass at first, but have gotten somewhat tolerable. Also, maybe after more evidences that make the infamous rumour debunked some more and a bunch of documentations of their interviews and such, at least some of the staff would be like "hm yeah, they're defs friends".
The second paragraph is what I was going for with this question. I meant about the Foundation's perception of Mozart and Salieri vs Mozzy and Celeri, rather than the Foundation's perception of Mozzy and Celeri changing over time; I should've worded the question better, but you appear to have answered it anyway.
I'm kinda actually liking this idea quite much, ngl >.>
You're more than welcome to use it. Regarding if you do decide to use it, then you maybe need to consider that the vast majority of the stuff about them being a pain in the ass perhaps isn't relevant beyond relating to their reactions to the rumour.
As I'm writing this, I'm considering that actually you could have them being annoying before the conflict, but it might dampen the emotional effect; like that they're just going from being annoying to being more annoying rather than experiencing a significant emotional change that results in them needing to be contained together.
Having them be assholes initially is a form of characterisation, but it may well mean that the emotional impact isn't as significant. You could have them demand to be contained together as their reactions instead, but that brings up other issues relating to "the Foundation does not just give anomalies what they want" and also historical accuracy, among other things. Play around with stuff (ask people in chat!) and see what works best.
I feel so bad about having difficulty and being terrible at explaining certain things, oh god. It doesn't help that I'm kinda embarrassed about it despite writing a lot about it in the drafts, oml- I really need some help in the explaining department. *winces*
Don't feel bad about struggling with writing stuff or articulating yourself; it is hard. If it's any consolation, I am also kind of embarrassed about the thing I'm writing atm, but it won't stop me from seeking critique when I'm ready for it.
As for helping with explanations, decide what narrative you want to use and lay it out like how I did before:
Set up: Celeri and Mozzarella are contained separately.
Build up: The rumour is brought up in the interviews.
Conflict: Celeri and Mozzarella each react in their different and problematic ways.
Conclusion: The Foundation resolve the problematic reactions by containing Celeri and Mozzarella together.
You can tailor this to however you want your narrative to pan out.
Then you add in important information:
- that they are catboy versions of 18th Century musicians
- describe what the rumour is for people who haven't heard of it and briefly explain the context
- explain briefly what Celeri and Mozzarella's reactions to the rumour are
- brief sentence regarding the change in their emotional conduct following being contained together
All of this explaining stuff goes in your central narrative section. Your hook should be whatever makes this story interesting to you, and your elevator pitch should ideally be one sentence with one comma explaining the main vibes of your story.
I'm contemplating greenlighting you here, but I think you still need to adequately explain the progression of your story (as above, or in a similarly-coherent way).
Hi!
For some reason, my brain isn't kinda liking the idea of them demanding to be together?
Me neither. I was just suggesting an alternative way you could possibly twist the ending without dampening the emotional impact. It's totally up to you what you actually decide to do with it.
Hm, would this work?
Yeah!
Got it. Revising their articles in my drafts.
I forgot to mention in the blockquote here that this stuff should probably be in full sentences in your central narrative section. It doesn't have to be but it just looks neater. In your draft you'll probably be showing their reactions rather than just saying that they reacted in a certain way, but here you can just state it.
Do I edit the original post or not?
Yes. You can edit it by using the blue "Options" button at the bottom-right corner of the original post. Once you've edited it, drop a reply here and I'll take another look (and probably give you a greenlight too). (Also mind the word limit. I don't think it will be an issue but you still need to stick to it.)
Hi!
How I would crit your current first post:
- How are your skips being problematic?
- What is their past like compared to now?
- What is the rumour, and what do they think about it?
- How was it dealt with?
This is all stuff we've already been over. You know what these details are. Don't have the same conversation with multiple different critters, it's a waste of time. Update the post to contain the details of your narrative so that your next critter is asking you mostly about specifics rather than big-picture stuff.
Set up: Celeri and Mozzarella are contained seperately and are already problematic
Build up: The rumour is brought up in interviews, they learn that they are contained in the same facility
Conflict: More problems arise such as Celeri and Mozarella's problematic, yet different reactions, Mozzarella started breaching containment, Celeri having less extreme, yet frequent breakdowns
Conclusion: The Foundation resolve the multiple issues by containing Celeri and Mozzarella together
This thing ^^^ that you wrote before can be copied and pasted into your central narrative section. Other reviewers are not required to read this conversation I'm having with you, so they don't know what your narrative is at the moment.
- that they are catboy versions of 18th Century musicians (you've done this one!)
- describe what the rumour is for people who haven't heard of it and briefly explain the context
- explain briefly what Celeri and Mozzarella's reactions to the rumour are
- brief sentence regarding the change in their emotional conduct following being contained together
Just to reiterate, this thing ^^^ that I wrote before should be answered in your central narrative section. With your first post, you shouldn't be trying to allude to the fact that you have a narrative, you should be telling the reviewers about your narrative and your characters and what specifically happens overall. All the details that you've told me in this conversation should be summarised in the first post. There is a word limit (400 words for the final four sections) but it's unlikely that you'll hit it.
Do I write it in their interviews and stuff?
Yes, if that's what you want to do.
Good luck!
Have a greenlight! I recommend sending this to somebody on the Butterfly Squad and throwing the link in chat. There may well be things I've missed or places where you haven't detailed specifics enough in the initial post but what other critters pick up on is up to them. You have solid characters and a solid narrative, you've made tons of progress from when you started, and you seem to know what you're doing. Good luck!
(This is a reply to a previous crit from tawny-critique but I'm not rearranging both my crit sandboxes for this incredibly messy, long-ass critique.)
Essentially, SCP articles are stories. If you read some Series VI articles, you'll notice the difference between them and, say, a lot of Series I articles; they aren't just descriptions of things that do things anymore.
"who interacts?" no one anymore
Bluntly, this, as it is, is boring as all hell. Create a character who interacts with the anomaly, and use them as a reason why the Foundation don't interact with the anomaly anymore.
"what happens to them?" beyond saving and usually death
Also boring. If they are "beyond saving", how do you intend to communicate that to your readers? Who tries to save them, and what emotions do they experience? There's nothing inherently wrong with using death as a plot point but we (your readers) should be given a reason to care about your characters' deaths. "Thing that kills you" is way overdone. Regardless, this question was more about what happens to the character when they interact with your anomaly. You said it "takes over their minds" but you didn't specify what actually happens.
"are there people immune yo the anomaly's effect?" no
Cool.
"how does the foundation interact with your anomaly?" They keep it in containment and are never allowed to take it out
Hmm… supposedly fine, but remember that SCP articles in-universe are connected collections of information about and interactions with an anomaly. If no one in the Foundation interacts with the anomaly, your narrative is in the past and it can feel dry and/or disjointed.
but i don't quite understand most of the rest you've said (yes i am very new to this and not that good at writing stories)
That's okay; you'll get better with practice and critique, that's the point. I can explain my questions.
How do the Foundation interact with the characters possessed by the anomaly?
This is a relay of the above, where I mentioned the possibility of having characters who were/are possessed by the anomaly? What sorts of things is the Foundation looking to learn about your anomaly and the people it possesses?
How do your characters react to the Foundation?
Likewise, how do your characters respond to the Foundation researching the anomaly? If they're possessed, you can assume it's actually the sword talking. You can (should) also consider their physical actions here; what does the sword actually make them do, beyond killing them? What emotions are they feeling? What emotions are your readers supposed to feel?
I do feel like either my idea i originally posted does leave a LOT to be imagined and I do want to point i could explain more with my draft
Do not send me your draft. What you can do is take pieces of your draft that show the overarching parts of your narrative (and put them in a reply here). What are the most important parts of your draft and how do they further your narrative towards a logical conclusion? Don't leave anything to be imagined.
also sorry for taking so long to respond
No worries! We all have irl lives too.
Overall, you need to think about the main plot points in your story. Set up, build up, conflict, conclusion. Conflict (obstacles your characters need to overcome) and conclusion (your characters' resolution; what they do after the conflict) are the most important.
I hope that helps.
Hi!
This is a cool idea! I do have a couple questions though.
Who are the characters your anomaly interacts with? How are each of their interactions different from that of the other characters? What emotions are they feeling in regards to a cassette tape flirting with them, in comparison to the anomaly's emotions?
I'm interested in how you're planning to show the interactions between the Foundation personnel and the anomaly. What information are you providing your readers in each of your interview logs and how does it further the narrative?
Additionally, the Foundation looks after their anomalies (cold not cruel, etc). How are you planning on writing this so it doesn't seem like the Foundation is intentionally abandoning the anomaly, and is instead doing what they think is beneficial for both them and it?
Seeing gradual change in the anomaly's emotional state in conjuction with the shortening tape through the perspective of the Foundation would be really interesting. You would be showing "both sides" except both sides would be tinted through the lens of one side. Mostly, I'm just emphasising that you need to be showing your anomaly's emotions spiralling as well as the Foundation's perceptions of its songs.
The hook is referencing early on within the article how testing is currently in indefinite suspension to draw interest as to why that’s the case.
Eh. There's nothing inherently wrong with this but there is a line between foreshadowing and ruining the ending. Be careful with it.
I don't know if you're allowed to reference real-life songs. I would recommend asking in #site17 in the IRC.
Good luck!
Hi!
0th will explain how the original owner came into possession of the tape and such which also relays some of the backgrounds of the tape (who made it, where it was, etc).
This can probably go into the description, or potentially a discovery log if you feel so inclined. Having multiple interviews is fine, but the contents of each interview should need to be in an interview. If you can just tell the information in one sentence, it doesn't need to be another interview. Keep it concise.
it will be instead that the anomaly can't be kept within a cassette player
This… kinda changes your narrative. If the anomaly is completely inactive when not in a cassette player then the Foundation could just leave it in a locker without facing any kind of moral or ethical issues. If you're going to do it so it originally had access to a cassette player at all times and then it didn't, that might make the Foundation seem cruel; whereas if it's active all the time but decides to stop talking on its own, you get the emotion without the ethical issues. It's something that requires some brainstorming, methinks.
I'm thinking I may put this idea on the back burner and do something else for my first SCiP so I can get more acquainted with the format and figure out how to properly handle a subject such as this as I think I'll need more planning to execute it properly.
That is more than fine. Read a lot of Series VI skips (getting in the IRC can help with that) and write up another idea when it comes to you. You've clearly thought a lot about this one, so I'm pretty willing to give you a greenlight, regardless of whether you ever choose to write it. (You can also get more crit using #thecritters in IRC and/or by asking somebody on the Butterfly Squad, which I highly recommend you do, even if you don't plan on writing the draft for this idea immediately.)
Chat guide is here. Reading all the tabs a couple times and registering your username should only take about 30 minutes and it's really not as complicated as it seems.
I wish you the absolute best of luck.
Hi! Summoned (via IRC!)
You don't really have a narrative here. I'm vaguely interested in, if also confused by, the idea, but it's nothing more than an idea at the moment, and what you do have is very crowded.
Like, is the lighthouse gathering data in order to find the conditions to create a utopia, or is the world a simulation created by the lighthouse? If it's the first one, or both, you need to be incredibly careful that you don't end up saying "eugenics is good, actually". What makes a utopian world, for you?
Moreover, how do the Foundation react to the anomaly and the situation it creates? What are they doing specifically? What are your major plot points? Etc. How are you planning on ending this?
You've mentioned the discovery and stuff about different GoIs having information about the anomaly, but it doesn't really lead anywhere. What are the specific implications of the various GoIs having access to this anomaly?
This allows the foundation to study the information that the entity has gathered.
What information specifically? Why does it matter and what do the Foundation discover from studying it? How does the information they learn from studying the anomaly influence their actions in the larger narrative?
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here or send me a .tell in the critters if you have answers to my questions and/or more to say.
Hi!
You've changed this a lot since I last critted it but you still haven't really explained the narrative. There's a lot going on in your first post; you talk a lot about what the skip could do theoretically, but not much about what it actually does in your story. I am certainly more interested in the premise than I was before, but reading the thread I have no idea where you plan to take this story.
You say about logs and documents coming from GoIs in the central narrative section, but you don't actually say what the contents of those documents is. Like, what is explained about its past; what sites does it visit and why those sites specifically and what does it do there; what is its purpose and how does its actual purpose differ from the Foundation's/GoIs' perception of it and its purpose?
I like the idea of including GoIs. You still need to talk about their actual perceptions of the anomaly and how they differ from that of the Foundation though, and also why the GoIs' perception of the anomaly matters to the Foundation.
My primary narrative can be that while life may have no intrinsic meaning, one can make their own and the second is dealing with grief and loss.
This isn't a narrative, they're just themes. They can work as themes, but the narrative has to imply them. I'm not getting either of these themes out of what you've written so far.
I feel like this would benefit from being streamlined so I have an exercise for you: describe each plot point in one sentence (maximum one comma per sentence). Ideally you should have at least a set up, a build up, a conflict, and a conclusion, but you can also add more points as long as they are connected and followed-through.
Hi!
You've got the structure laid out fairly well here. The actual content is a bit… random? I think it's because there's not enough detail in places and things that seem non-sensical or out of place.
tracking its movements
Does it move? Why are the movements significant to your story?
prototype
Prototype of what?
take the prototype and repurpose it to contact the entity
It already does this. You said before that the prototype is designed to contact the entity so why is Dr. Q repurposing it?
analyze their biological data to determine if
To determine if what?
Upon discovering the world is a simulation
You don't previously state that the world is a simulation. You state that SCP-XXXX creates simulations of end-of-world scenarios, but that doesn't mean that the world is currently a simulation or that it will ever be one. If you want to imply this, you need to specify that the lighthouse actively affects the world, rather than that it's just interested in what the world is doing and how it could end.
Dr. Q has found new purpose to either exit the program or end it.
What does this actually mean? What is the difference between exiting the program and ending it? This also isn't really a conclusion as it's written here. Having Dr. Q either exit or end the program would provide a conclusion, even without explaining what the consequences of their actions were (because the consequences can be implied earlier on in the story). You also don't follow through on the salvation/damnation idea. Does the lighthouse seek salvation or damnation or something else for humanity? Why?
Hi!
This is a really interesting idea but you haven't really explained your narrative. You need to actually show what happens inside the website.
What do each of the entities in the game do, and how does it influence the reader's decisions? Why are they so many of them, and why do they take those forms specifically?
I can't help thinking that it would be more interesting to have the reader be the D-Class the entire time (i.e. after the conprocs and the description) rather than having character descriptions first. Immersion and all that. (i.e. test logs can be really boring and difficult to get right. You definitely could use a test log but it would likely contain information you'd already stated or implied.)
What actually is the escape room? What does it look like? What puzzles is the D-Class solving? What emotions are you trying to evoke here? Is the D-Class in physical danger, like in Jumanji or Escape Room? Is there a time limit?
Essentially, what is the story? The overarching narrative happens inside the escape room; so explain what actually happens and how it furthers your narrative. Like any story, you need plot points: set up, build up, conflict, conclusion.
Overall, this is really cool, but you need to explain the actual story in more detail.
As for greenlights, they don't expire. I would recommend seeking greenlights if you want to write this because even if you don't write it for a while you would still have the greenlights for when you do want to write it.
Feel free to reply here if you have answers to my questions and/or more to say. If you flesh out your story I'll be more than happy to greenlight you.
Hey, so, um… you're not really giving us much to work with here.
SCP articles are stories disguised as scientific reports. To create a story, you need a narrative arc and you need characters. To create an SCP article specifically, you also need an anomaly and the Foundation should feature beyond the discovery of the anomaly. You don't currently have any of that.
What is the point of the maze? How is it even anomalous? What is the difference between your maze and the one I hypothetically decided to build just now?
Once you've got an anomaly, you need characters. Who interacts with your anomaly? Especially, how do the Foundation interact with your anomaly?
Narrative arc-wise, you need a set up, a build up, a conflict, and a conclusion. SCP articles aren't just things that do things anymore, and they were never just "we found this regular thing in the desert".
Make the maze anomalous, and build a story around it. Explain how it is anomalous and what your characters do and what the Foundation does and what the story is to your reviewers and you might stand a chance of getting greenlit.
Also, what is it a reference to? Using references is usually fine as long as you don't 1) copy them directly and 2) base your entire article on understanding the reference. I would generally lean away from it but if the reference is just "mazes exist in other media and also in my article" then it's fine.
Also also, you don't appear to have a sandbox, which is what we use here to write our drafts. You can ask for an invite to the sandbox site in #site17 on the IRC.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here when you've fleshed out your idea. I'm also around in #thecritters a lot if you want real-time feedback.
Hello.
SCP articles are stories, friend. If you read some Series V and VI articles, especially, you will notice they have narratives/plotlines/storylines/whatever you want to call them. They are stories about anomalous objects/people/places written in a particular format. Most people here don't find it interesting to read about anomalies just existing in-universe anymore, they want more than that. Characters, interactions, emotions, etc.
To reiterate:
SCP articles are stories disguised as scientific reports. To create a story, you need a narrative arc and you need characters. To create an SCP article specifically, you also need an anomaly and the Foundation should feature beyond the discovery of the anomaly. You don't currently have any of that.
You don't have an anomaly yet, let alone a story. If you're unsure about characters/setting/plot points/etc, start by at least explaining to me how the maze is anomalous.
Hi!
A music file that develops associative Synesthesia in a host, associating positive things (sounds, smell, etc) as negative ideas. ruining any connections with family and friends.
So the overall idea is that the file causes the development of synesthesia in people? I don't really know much about synesthesia, but the stimuli association thing is often associated with trauma, so there's definitely a potential to do some wacky emotional stuff here (as long as it remains respectful etc.)
While you do have a complete narrative arc here, it's got some issues, all of which can and should be combined together but are separated for convenience:
1) It's kind of flat? Like anomaly makes people develop a neurodivergency, the Foundation turn up and reverse it and then leave. There's really no build-up and it's kind of boring atm. You need a set up, a build up, a conflict, and a conclusion. There's also the issue of viewing neurodivergencies as negative things, when they really aren't.
2) You haven't mentioned any of the actual effects of synesthesia. What specific things are happening to specific characters and how does it affect them, physically and emotionally? This goes back to the stuff about association and familial relationships that you mentioned at the top of your post.
3) The Foundation barely feature. Remember that the Foundation are writing the article in-universe so they need to feature in it beyond the discovery of the anomaly. How do the Foundation interact with your characters and with your anomaly?
Neil seems like an interesting character. Do we ever get to hear his perspective? What are his motives? Etc.
Teal deer: this has the potential to be really interesting but you need to explain the narrative in more detail, you need specific characters with specific emotions, and the Foundation need to feature beyond the discovery.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here with answers to my questions and/or if you have more to say.
Hi!
A couple things:
1) You need an elevator pitch. A couple sentences that summarises your article. What is your article about?
2) The current range for SCP articles is 001-5999. 7001 will not be open for quite some time. You can use XXXX as a placeholder if you wish.
3) You haven't provided enough information here. I don't know what your anomaly is, I don't know what it does, I don't know what the story is, etc. You need to explain your idea in full here.
3a) If you have a draft you're looking to get reviewed and you don't want to seek greenlights or ideas critique, you can go to the IRC and ask there (although there's no guarantee anybody will crit a non-greenlit draft).
Bouncing off of 3): What is your anomaly? What are its properties and behaviours? Who are your characters and how do they interact with your anomaly? What are the major plot points in your story? Where do the Foundation come into this, beyond containing your anomaly?
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here with answers to my questions and/or if you have more to say.
Hi!
My article is about a sentient computer virus that possesses devices and causes general mayhem.
What specific mayhem does it cause? What specifically is it doing to cause problems for the Foundation? How do the Foundation resolve it?
SCP-XXXX is basically a computer virus that travel on sound-waves and can possess electronic devices.
I don't know much about computer viruses but I'm pretty sure they don't travel on sound waves. If that's the anomalous part of your virus (since computer viruses aren't inherently anomalous), you need to explain how it travelling on sound waves is important to the story.
It is not hostile, but does sometimes cause injury, with one recorded death.
It sounds hostile. What were the details of the death and injuries, and how do you plan to detail them in your draft? (i.e. what format?)
Kept on a COMPUTER.
If the virus is stored on a computer, does it not have the potential to spread to other devices? Or does it require human input to travel?
My main issue with this is that computer viruses aren't inherently anomalous. If you don't have an anomaly and a narrative, it's not an SCP article.
To reiterate the questions from my previous reply:
1) Who are your characters and how do they interact with your anomaly? What are the major plot points in your story?
2) Where do the Foundation come into this, beyond containing your anomaly?
Remember that how the Foundation interact with your anomaly is generally more important than what the anomaly does.
You also need to read some Series VI skips to see how narratives work in the format.
Good luck!
Hello again.
Questions you have not answered:
(The ones about the Foundation are bolded because they are probably the most important, but I would like it if you could answer all of them.)
1) What specifically is your anomaly doing to cause problems for the Foundation?
2) How do the Foundation resolve it?
3) What were the details of the death and injuries, and how do you plan to detail them in your draft? (i.e. what format?)
4) Who are your characters and how do they interact with your anomaly?
5) Where do the Foundation come into this, beyond containing your anomaly?
6) What are the major plot points in your story? (You need a set up, a build up, a conflict, and a conclusion; the answers to questions 1+2 are the conflict and the conclusion respectively.)
New questions:
For example, it does likes to trigger random devices at random times, typically causing the owner to trade the device or sell it thinking it is broken.
7) What does it get out of this? Why does it do it?
8) What is SCP-XXXX-A?
9) How does Phalanx contain the virus?
10) How does the virus travel on sound waves? If somebody speaks near a computer it's on, what happens? Etc.
P.S.:
The SCP Wiki is not in any way affiliated with Containment Breach, and most people here don't play it. I believe CB have their own website, if that's your thing.
I respect your right to be a casual fan, and if you enjoy CB that's cool, but if you want to write for the mainsite I recommend reading Series V and VI more than Series I. Series I is okay but it doesn't represent the site's writing standards anymore.
Hello.
1) I'm not sure what class your anomaly would be, but Object Classes don't denote threat or danger, just ease of containment. Also the Foundation contain anomalies because they're anomalous, not because they're dangerous. That's kinda the point of literally everything they do? This also isn't the answer to the corresponding question. What specifically is your anomaly doing to cause problems for the Foundation?
2) Okay, so how can you show the process of the Foundation containing the anomaly? How do they come to the conclusion that they can't make noise around the anomaly?
3 + 8) You haven't answered 3 because I asked you to explain the details of the death and the other injuries, which you haven't done. Explain to me how Dr Kye dies. What does the anomaly explicitly do to kill them? You also seem to have misunderstood how SCP articles work? SCP-XXXX-A denotes either a part of an anomaly that functions separately or separate anomalous instances created by the original anomaly (headcanons differ); it's not the title of your addendum. Additionally, SCP articles are Tales, they're just in a specific format (you're still telling a story here, not just describing an anomaly).
4) Okay, but you said before about Dr Kye. They're a character, and they interact with the anomaly. So what do they do? Why are they interacting with the anomaly? What happens to them?
5) I'm interested by this answer because it is a backstory but it seems like you've gone from "it's just vibing on a computer" to "it's extremely harmful" without an explanation as to why it does those things. What drives it?
6) So remember when I said before that the answers to 1+2 were your conflict and your conclusion? The conflict here is that the anomaly kills Dr Kye, the conclusion is that the Foundation contain the anomaly. The addendum seems random and disjointed, like you're using it as an excuse to write a non-specific death (my anomaly is the most dangerous etc etc) rather than as a way to further the story.
7) Ideas crit is a place where you can change your mind about your anomaly and your narrative. If you want your anomaly to be hostile, it can be, but it has to be hostile for a reason. Essentially, if it's causing problems, it's doing it for a specific reason, and you need to know what that reason is, because it changes the direction of your narrative.
9) Cool; wacky tech is fine probably.
10) I am not a scientist either and I don't know how those words fit together but as long as you know what you're doing then go for it I guess.
11) You are welcome. Zyn beat me to it, but I am not a staff member. I agree with you that some people are toxic but if you are referring to specific people (especially experienced reviewers and/or staff members) I suggest you don't do that.
Hi!
You are dealing with two connected but separate anomalies here. The robot isn't particularly anomalous on its own (except perhaps for being sentient); it's just overly attached to the paper. You almost have a coherent story here; it's just not anomalous. The paper is anomalous, but you don't actually show the repercussions of the paper's effects.
My real question here is "Why?". Why is the robot so attached to the paper? What does the robot's attachment have to do with the paper's anomalous affect? How are they connected, beyond physically?
Who are your characters? How are they affected by the paper? Like, specifically what happens to who, and how do they solve it? How do they solve the issue of the robot being aggressive when not holding the paper? Can they just… swap it for a regular piece of paper? Etc.
Overall, it's a cool idea, but you need to make sure you're focusing on the paper and its anomalous effects and how the Foundation interact with the paper specifically. The robot is the focus of your conflict and your conclusion; it's important, but it's not your anomaly. Play around with the anomaly's effects; why are they important to your story?
Because it has a friendly nature most of the time, it has been denominated a safe scp.
The word you are looking for is "designated", and that's not how object classes work. Safe usually refers to inanimate objects - like the paper - that can be locked in a box without anything happening. Danger and other factors beyond ease of containment can be written directly in the containment procedures or description. There's also the ACS and esoteric classes, but I'm not entirely sure where the robot would fit. That being said, the paper is the actual anomaly, and thus would likely be designated as Safe Class.
I hope that helps! Feel free to reply here if you have answers to my questions and/or more to say.
Hi! (Summoned (via PM!))
Panic leads to normally peaceful civilians committing cruel and ruthless behavior.
What behaviour specifically? What do they do, and why does it matter to your readers? Is it just generic chaos, or do we have time to get to know the characters and care about them hurting each other?
This sort of leads onto my next question about perspectives. If it's from Quo's perspective, you can afford to be vague about the chaos the passengers are causing, provide a few examples and you're probably good. If it's from the passengers' perspectives, you'd need to be more specific and it risks making the narrative disjointed.
The second would be from passengers whom detail their experiences from an outside experience, giving us an insight into Quo’s behavior from and external perspective.
I'm kind of torn on this. On one hand, the passengers' experiences and emotions are an interesting part of this story and would allow your readers to empathise with the passengers, but I think maybe writing this as Quo's story might work better? It provides a singular focus, and would likely prevent your narrative from becoming disjointed from including too many perspectives. If you can explain what specific experiences you plan to write in the second perspective and how they connect to Quo's point of view then I might change my mind?
Also, which characters (passenger characters) are you following? How are they characterised? How do they feel about being stuck on the ship and left to die? How do they feel about Quo?
I'm also wondering about the Foundation. Is it one specific researcher writing the document in-universe, or just the Foundation in general?
This is set out incredibly well, and it's an interesting story; you've clearly thought a lot about it. Other than the things mentioned above, I can't really fault it. If you can provide answers to my questions then I'll happily greenlight you.
Hi!
I think the perspective is really down to personal preference, and if you're confident in writing a story with multiple perspectives that won't end up disjointed then I commend you. You can always play around with it in the draft stage if you happen to decide it doesn't feel right.
The actual riot itself is never explicitly mentioned at first but rather hinted at by Quo's logs and Foundation reports of internal damage to the ship that seems to be intentionally inflicted.
I'm not sure about this. On one hand, tension. On the other hand, what are you planning on filling the gap with? Because you have Quo deciding to tell the passengers they're all going to die and then you have the riot, but if we don't know about the riot until later then there's a space in between that may well exist as a surplus. I could see the Foundation reports working well here to allude that something bad has happened without specifying, but I'm not sure why Quo wouldn't write explicitly about the riot as it was happening.
Passenger 2
I'm curious as to where Passenger 2 comes into the story. You mentioned that Passenger 1's son dies which gives me some insight into what purpose she serves beyond as a counterpoint to Quo's tone, but you haven't done the same for Passenger 2. What insight does Passenger 2 provide for the Foundation and for your readers? What does he tell us that Quo and Passenger 1 don't?
Hi!
a redacted researcher
I don't like this. Blackboxing can be good, but nowadays names generally don't get blackboxed at all. If they do, it's usually not because they aren't relevant, but instead to hide their identities. The solution here would probably be to keep the report anonymous entirely; don't even mention a name, just state the hypothesis as part of the report. Or you can have this researcher writing all the reports (which is a form of characterisation in itself).
Other than the above, which is a very minor detail that mostly revolves around personal preference and can be modified in the draft stage anyway, this looks really good. Have a greenlight. I wish you the absolute best of luck with this and I hope it goes well. Please feel free to get back to me if you have any more questions.
Hi! Thanks for replying!
Hmm. I'm kinda torn on this?
I'm unsure what's happened with the timeline ("1953", specifically), since it would make more sense for the ritual to be ancient and the carnival to be its modern replacement, since Albert is a ghost and all. Unless it's a cult attempting to revive the tradition? But then you might end up falling into horror movie devil-worshipper tropes and over-complicating your narrative. Midsommar is a pretty good representation of a modern-day Pagan cult based on ancient practices, if you do want to go down the cult line.
With the timeline, it's worth remembering that while Paganism is an ongoing religion it existed pre-Christianity and not a lot is actually known about it from that time, so you can probably get away with making up your own festivals if you really want to. There is probably not any issue with depicting human sacrifice as a Pagan practice, but you probably need to make sure it's depicted as a sacred ritual with explicit spiritual consequences and a reason for doing it rather than something just done to be evil or whatever. It does depend on the perspective that you're taking but essentially, check with somebody else and do some googling, you should be fine as long as you are not vilifying or making fun of, especially modern, Pagan practices in general. (By all means vilify cults, but also recognise that cults are bad because they are cults not because they are of a certain religion)
It's important to look at the time in which the ritual is being performed. Hundreds of years ago there were different standards in many different religions, whereas today human sacrifice is usually considered to be murder, regardless of the religion or cult it takes place in. Consider what the Foundation would think about the ritual and reflect that in your writing.
I'm unsure about the bulls. Distressed bulls that have horns are probably just going to impale you, rather than wait to have a person tied to them. Also horns probably wouldn't have particularly good grip on a rope? Idk about that bit, really. Logistically, it's probably better to tie him to their legs? Additionally, having your limbs torn off is functionally just traumatic amputation, as far as I can tell, so it's unlikely Albert would die instantly? These are just minor details, but this scene seems to be a big part of your plot so they're worth thinking about.
She must, as her reputation here is ruined.
Why would getting pregnant in Scotland in 1992 ruin her reputation?
As for the Foundation's involvement in this, I want to know more about the interview. Albert is your anomaly, right? So while it works well that your conclusion is the Foundation looking for his child, they would also be interested in him. What part of the story are you planning on having him tell the Foundation directly? You could instead make the child the anomaly, and just have Albert as the storyteller, which may well actually work better since the child would be mentioned from the beginning.
The story ends with the ghost in containment at one of the various SCP facilities.
I don't like this. I'm not usually a fan of having an open ending, but I think you have a solid enough story here to have the ending point towards the Foundation continuing their search for the child. At the moment, Albert doesn't really serve a purpose to the Foundation beyond telling them about the backstory and about the child. Whether or not he's in containment at the end of the story isn't a huge detail, and it doesn't really matter.
Overall, you've got a solid backstory and you bring the Foundation into it in the modern day. The stuff above is mostly just minor details about setting and specifics. Clarify those things/acknowledge it's something you'll consider when drafting and I'm happy to greenlight you.
Hello!
Randall was given Anesthetics
The word you are looking for here is "amnestics". The amnestics "guides" (actually essays) are here and here.
You've got a complete, fleshed-out narrative here and I'm pretty confident you know what you're doing. Have a greenlight!
Good luck!
Summoned (via IRC!)
Hi! Sorry for the wait.
(Potentially-harsh crit contained within)
I'm gonna be harsh here and say I'm not really feeling this. It doesn't seem to differ from Narcissus' story, which means it's basically just a "thing that makes you kill yourself" with the add-on of being an already-existing story.
I want the character study of the agent to be the main meat of the article complete with a recovery log, interview, and personal journal entries.
I'm interested in all of this ^^^ but you haven't provided any of the details. Like, I want to care about your agent, but I just don't. Currently they're just a way to show that your skip uses compulsion to kill people, rather than an actual person in themselves.
Why does your skip kill people? What's the point? What do the Foundation find interesting about it? What character development are you planning on utilising so that your readers actually care when your agent dies? What does the agent do beyond dying? Why is your agent there in the first place? What are the other cases?
Basically you have the potential to make something really cool out of this but you currently aren't doing that.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here if you have answers to my questions and/or more to say.
Hi!
I absolutely want there to be a way to recover from the effects.
Do people require repeated exposure to the skip before they drown? Or is it based on the amount of time spent in contact with the skip? i.e. if your agent is removed from contact with the skip, do they recover?
NPD
NPD is a heavily-stigmatised disorder. Be careful to portray it respectfully and to not vilify people who are affected by it irl. I saw fairydoctor linked a subreddit about narcissistic abuse, but it should be made very clear that NPD does not make people inherently abusive, and that not all abusers have NPD. Remember that disabled people are more likely to be abused than to abuse people. Abuse should be heard, and abusers vilified, but should not be generalised; it's ableist. (Hit me up in IRC if you want clarification on this)
Narcissus' Revenge on the world
This is what I was looking for for the questions about why your skip kills people and what the point is. This will work well as an underlying drive, but you should probably hint at it in your draft.
I'm going to make the daffodils moveable…
This entire section leads me to the question "What do the Foundation use it for?" Also, if Narcissus' daffodil is still able to communicate with people to an extent, are the others also able to communicate in their original forms? Or do they all become identical to Narcissus?
I wanted to keep the concept short and sweet
I recommend adding the important details to your original post. A lot of the stuff you mention in this reply is core central narrative progression stuff. This link: http://www.scpwiki.com/forum/t-13369776/how-do-i-remain-brief-when-writing-an-scp-concept is pretty cool if you ever end up writing another one of these forum threads.
The above point is stricken out because I'm giving you a greenlight, but it's something to keep in mind if you make more ideas threads. The other stuff is things to consider in drafting, but feel free to reply here or ping me in IRC if you have more to say.
Hi!
This is instantly reminding me of Stephen King's Needful Things, a book I have not read but have heard the synopsis of many, many times. The basic premise is trading your soul for things you desire. It also reminds me of a lot of other things because while your idea isn't exactly the same, it still plays on common tropes. Regardless of whether an idea is unique or not, you still need a narrative, but without an original idea the skip itself will also have to stand out.
My main question here is who are your characters? Who interacts with your skip, and how, and what are the implications?
How do the Foundation come into this story, beyond just containing the anomaly? How the Foundation interacts with the anomaly is more important than what the anomaly does.
You seem to have a lot going on here and I can't help but feel you're overcomplicating your idea. Having your skip breach containment or attack other skips would be a conflict point, but unless it happens for a reason it's not super interesting. Crosslinking in this might end up being complicated, and I wouldn't recommend it for your first skip, but it's not impossible if it's something you feel will further your narrative.
An exercise for you:
- Explain each plot point in your story in one sentence each (one comma per sentence maximum). You should at the very least have a set up, a build up, a conflict, and a conclusion.
Don't blackbox in your ideas thread. If the information is irrelevant, take it out. If it's relevant, tell us. More info on blackboxing here.
Hi! (Summoned via PM)
Researcher interviews the operatives who recovered the jinn upon arrival to Jinn was disoriented with a static charge and promptly detained before transportation to site 42
On one hand, this is all discovery stuff. What's the contents of the interview? Could you condense the contents of the interview into a discovery log? Why is it important that the researcher specifically is interviewing people? (We can presume she's writing the document in-universe.)
On the other hand, using an interview here (i.e. fairly near the beginning of the document) would introduce the researcher character as somebody who is invested in the jinn's case from the beginning.
he suspects the jinn had killed them simultaneously
Why does the jinn kill them all simultaneously? Does it always do this? What is particularly significant about the child's corpse found by the shrine in comparison to the rest of the corpses?
Jinn interacts with subjects and results are recorded
Which subjects? (Who are your characters?) How do they interact with the jinn? What does the jinn do in the recordings? What are the results?
Researcher is perplexed by the jinn's actions
Why? They already presumed it kills people so why are they confused that it killed someone?
during a log, her communicator starts relaying a sequence of words: "Home", "Child", "Kill", "Catch", "Sorry"
What's the significance of these words? What do they follow through to?
She reviews logbooks recovered from the site detailing interactions between the villagers and the jinn
Are the logbooks from the village? Who was keeping them? What are the interactions? Obviously CURSED is the important one here, but how are you going to make CURSED's request stand out from the rest of the villagers'? Additionally, you don't really follow through on the idea about material wealth, which you probably should be doing because it's important to your story.
Researcher interrogates the jinn regarding that specific log
What does she ask it?
she discovers the nature of the jinn's ability
What is the nature of the jinn's ability?
researcher empathizes with the jinn
Why? What reason does the researcher have to empathise with the jinn? What does it offer her?
she is threatened with reassignment pending a psychiatric evaluation
Probably more accurate here to say that she was reassigned, or that at the very least taken off the case.
researcher is pronounced terminated and her name is expunged from logs.
The thing with this, as well as being a kind of weak ending, is that SCP articles aren't always told chronologically. Even if her name is expunged from the logs at the end of the story out-of-universe, it would be expunged from the entire document in-universe, starting with the conprocs. This means your readers won't know her name, which means it's harder for them to empathise with her. Also I hate blackboxing so it would probably kinda kill it for me.
Overall, this is looking better than it was before. You've got a solid narrative structure here. I'm not sure about the ending, but I've expressed my concerns above. Having a discovery log near the beginning of the article seems a little strange but if it works to further your narrative then it doesn't matter. You can easily move it when you're drafting if you feel the need to.
The questions here are really just about important details within the narrative, because you've got the structure. If you answer them I'll consider greenlighting you.
Hi! (Summoned via PM)
Yes, the researcher is invested in this particular SCP since the first day, my first thought was to make the discovery log "Audiolog 0". Later I decided against it as the scene playing out in my head sounded too informal. I thought I had removed it from the list, but I must have forgotten.
Remember that the format isn't something you have to decide during ideas crit and then stick to; you can change things when you're drafting. Having the researcher be invested from the beginning is a good idea; how are you currently planning on showing that?
It was late and I had been pulling all-nighters for three days to make sure I had something acceptable.
Not related to the story but please look after yourself. Don't burn out over an ideas thread; take your time.
The child's corpse is significant because it's within proximity to the jinn itself.
What does this imply? Why is this child specifically in such close proximity to the jinn, when the rest of the villagers aren't? I'm just thinking that this is something you could focus on, but you don't mention it beyond the discovery log. (EDIT: if CURSED is the child, disregard this)
The reason why the jinn kills all of them cannot be revealed at the beginning
What is the reason though? Because you don't mention it later on in your first post (which is why I asked). Ideas threads are meant to show the whole story, not just allude to it. (EDIT: You answer this later on the reply; disregard.)
but I can tell you that it does not always do this.
So what does it usually do? And why is this time different? (EDIT: You answer this later on the reply; disregard.)
While yes the jinn can kill, it doesn't when it first arrives. Instead, it does something else, something they didn't expect. Instead of death, they are simply aged in correspondence to a wish. The researcher notes that not all subjects had a wish granted.
This is what I was looking for. In your first post you imply that the jinn kills people every time, even though that's not the case. I think you need to specify that the villagers die because of CURSED, rather than because they interacted with the jinn.
The researcher is confused because it was recorded that the jinn was something that would kill everything, but this is the first recorded death in almost two weeks since she was assigned to it. I'd like to think this kind of activity would confuse anybody.
In light of the previous point, this now makes sense.
The logs that could be salvaged listed curing lethal illnesses, having an abundant harvest, or even protection from natural disasters.
Yeah, I just wanted examples here. Cool.
Why was he kicked out? "Greed"
Is CURSED the child? That would make a lot of sense, but it's not something I would've guessed from your first post.
It's a tricky question to answer with single-word responses. The researcher will likely find a new device to use for communication.
I'm torn on this, consistency-wise. I agree it will be hard to tell the story in one-word/other short answers, but if you could use the questions to imply the answers for the previous interview then you can also do it for the other interviews. It's also totally possible to use other forms of communication if you feel it's easier and explains the situation better.
I liked the idea of leaving it a mystery to the reader, but I can change it if that would be better.
Showing that the researcher wishes to be with the jinn without showing what specifically happens to her is fine, and probably good, actually. With the ending, you do need to imply (probably state) that something happens to her, beyond wishing to be with the jinn. How do the Foundation react to her breaking protocol so severely? Termination, like you mentioned before, is a possible route, but a lot of people don't like it. I would be more in favour of the Foundation terminating her for breaking protocol than of the jinn killing her for no reason.
The point you referenced here about the researcher being reassigned is before she wishes to be with the jinn forever, according to your first post. ("she is threatened with reassignment pending a psychiatric evaluation" —> "she breaks protocol to visit the jinn anyway" —> "in a panic, she accidentally wishes to always be with it") Her being taken off the case rather than just threatened with it makes more sense when it comes to breaking protocol.
My original intention was to make the reader curious about who she was, but if that takes away from relating with the character then I won't do that.
Yeah I honestly think blackboxing her name isn't worth it. Ask people when you get to draft crit though. If you do choose to have the researcher terminated by the Foundation, expunging her name from the logs is possible but it might take away from the emotional connection and make the article harder to read (because blackboxing creates a break in the visual field). You do have a solid narrative though so perhaps blackboxing her name would create a sense of mystery. It's up to you.
I'm pretty happy with this, to be honest. I think cleaning up your first post to remove any surplus information and add in the important details would benefit you.
As long as CURSED is the child in the discovery log and you state that and all the other narrative details here in your first post, I'm more than happy to greenlight you. (You don't have to use the one sentence thing if you don't want to, but I still recommend keeping it succinct.)
(Places where there are EDITs especially are things you can and should include information on in your first post. Explaining CURSED's narrative arc is important because it's a huge part of your story.)
Hi!
researcher is amnestied and demoted to trainee for 5 years
I like this. There's a headcanon that D-Class get amnesticised every 30 days but I've never seen it applied to a researcher. There's also getting demoted to D-Class, which isn't really written or received well anymore, but this is an interesting play on it and I'm excited to see how it works out for you.
surprise message at bottom directed at researcher (for closure of her story)
What is the contents of the message? Who is it from? What closure does it provide?
Hi!
I like the idea of having a message left for Audrey for when she is Level 3 but I can't help but feel it would be difficult to introduce this character in full so late on in the story. If Audrey already interacts with him following the demotion, there's no reason in-universe for him to introduce himself to her in the message, but out-of-universe your readers don't know who he is. Having him explain that he intervened in her fate is probably enough, but if you're trying to specify that he did it because he knew her previously that's going to be harder. It would be implied that by saving her he was looking out for her, so you probably don't need to specify that.
I also don't understand why it would be written on the document in-universe. A letter or an email would be better I think.
I'm pretty willing to greenlight you here. I wish you the absolute best of luck with your draft.
Hi! (Summoned via IRC)
When the loved one is called using this SCP, the loved one will report some form of immediate threat to their life, prompting the caller to rush to their location, only to be prevented of reaching the individual they called.
This is the interesting part of your story. It's where you're trying to evoke emotion. There's nothing wrong with this part, but the rest of the post is not a linear narrative and it overshadows the main emotional drive of your story.
I'm somewhat confused by your elevator pitch because it seems you have two anomalies: 1) Cellphone that makes you abusive and/or paranoid and/or display unconditional love (???) and 2) Humanoid (TM). There's nothing inherently wrong with having two anomalies but it can overshadow your narrative if they don't fit together.
That is, unless they can learn to love again…
This implies that abusers displaying love towards their victims negates the abuse their victims suffered. It doesn't. A survivor's choice to forgive their abuser is their's to make, and it very often has nothing to do with the love displayed by their abuser, but rather with both whether the abuser has stopped abusing them and regrets their actions. Even then it doesn't negate the fact that they were abused. Regardless, this doesn't lead to anything narratively because you don't mention it again.
recovery of the object
What happens in this section, why does it happen that way, how does it further your narrative, and how are you planning on making it interesting to your readers?
a variety of individuals
Which individuals? Who are your characters?
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
No. NPD does not make people abusive. I have known a lot of abusive people and none of them have NPD. I know one person with NPD and they were selfish at times, egotistical, and they didn't often take other people's feelings into account but they never hurt me or, to my knowledge, anybody else. Implying that all abusers have NPD and/or that all people with NPD are abusive is ableism and promotes active stigmatisation of people with Cluster B disorders.
individuals who lack any sort of family or friends.
Same with the above. Although you could create an active researcher character who considers their lack of relationships (or NPD) a positive thing in relation to being able to study this skip, the way you've written it here is stigmatising. Vilify abusers without dragging down disabled people and abuse survivors please.
Overall, your narrative feels pretty disjointed. You talk a lot about the format but I'm not sure how the events connect to each other.
Test logs are… not great. As well as my personal dislike for them, they are generally used because they're flashy formatting rather than actually needed. They can work successfully when showing the same things tested in different conditions, but overusing them when you could just state the results or use a different format to better show progression is a problem. Just state what the events are and how they connect, the format is usually irrelevant until you get to drafting.
I'm vaguely interested in the interaction between the humanoid anomaly and the cellphone but I'm not sure what the humanoid represents or what's driving it to want the person to beat the cellphone or why it's torturing this person.
I think better outlining what the cellphone anomaly actually does and why the humanoid does what it does is imperative here. This concept as a whole has potential but you need to scrap the ableism and streamline the idea into one thing. Basically there's too much going on at once to actually crit this as a formed concept yet.
I'm not convinced with bringing abuse into this at all; it seems like you're trivialising it rather than writing about it in a respectful way. I wrote this part before I reconsidered but I thought I would leave it in anyway because the second sentence especially is something you really need to consider when writing this story.
Additionally, the version that cybersqyd critted on the 20th is much more my vibe. It's not detailed enough right now, but it revolves much more around the fear created by the situation the characters are in (being physically separated from their family) rather than this weird emotion of "I actually love the person I abused so you should feel sorry for me" which feels… wrong.
If your story is about an anomaly that stops abusers from reaching their victims, that's part of your overall narrative, but I'm not really seeing that yet because your anomalies do too many contradictory things and you also switch rapidly between vilifying abusers and enabling them.
Put each of your plot points in one sentence. You need a set up, a build up, a conflict, and a conclusion.
My final, and probably most important, question is "Where do the Foundation come into this?" How the Foundation interacts with the anomaly is more important than what the anomaly does, but you haven't mentioned them at all.
I hope that helps. Feel free to reply here if you have answers to my questions and/or more to say.
Hello.
I can understand how a "learn to love again" story and abuse could be considered as trivialization and convolutes the overall narrative.
I agree with the first part. I don't think it inherently convolutes the narrative (the narrative isn't fully-formed here for other reasons), but you don't currently seem to have the knowledge to be able to write this in an accurate and respectful way. I mean that in the best way.
As for the overall narrative purpose of NPD, I wanted the object to affect people who care deeply about others.
The opposite is coming off in your original post. I would highly suggest rewording it if this is your intention.
lacks an ability for empathy
Lots of disorders cause low empathy. Empathy is not the same as compassion, either. Neurodivergencies are incredibly complex things and applying a blanket statement is not a good idea. Even just changing it from "NPD" to "people who don't display compassion" would massively improve this. (I have low empathy and, speaking from personal experience, it doesn't mean I don't love people or that I don't display love or compassion towards people.)
Using "NPD" or "low empathy" or even "low compassion" also means that, like, you don't include abusers who do genuinely love their victims. Because that's a thing. Hurting somebody because you thought you were doing the best thing for them is definitely something that exists. I feel like focusing on who is generally immune to the cellphone isn't important to your narrative, because you're only following one person. Why does it matter to the Foundation that there's a hypothetical group immune to the anomaly's effects and how does it have implications on this story specifically?
but rather that their lack of empathy makes it difficult or near impossible for the object to have an effect on said individual.
Again, this is the opposite of what you implied in your original post. I think the problem is that your narrative goes in a lot of directions and you haven't really decided on each part of your story, so you keep contradicting yourself. I think taking some time to streamline your narrative and figure out what your object does and who it specifically affects is most important here.
As for the humanoid aspect, I originally planned for it to be a common factor in events that prevent the subject from reaching the individual they called, somewhat like a spirit or etherial entity that causes small things to happen to prevent the caller from reaching the destination (battery failure of a car, for example.) and be somewhat of a personification of the concern the caller has about the well-being of the person they called.
Okay but why? Why is the entity doing that? What drives it? Depending on the story you choose to write, this entity can be either malevolent or benevolent. That choice is important because it carries a lot of the emotional weight in the story.
The recovery of the object is something that I have thought about in a variety of ways, but my main thought is that the object would have been recovered after a mother testifies about "A demonic spirit stopping her from saving her baby." during a murder trial where the last phone call (from the SCP) was linked to the mother and the victim of said murder.
Is the point that the mother murdered her baby? It kinda ties into quickestsilver's idea and the part after it about how being overprotective can be harmful. I also don't really understand why or how she would kill her baby, and also this is veering into insensitive territory again. Be careful.
I kinda wanted this story to be something to the effect of protecting the ones you love is a good thing, but too much of even the most basic of instincts (protecting those you care about) can lead to harm (emotional abuse, controlling behaviors, etc.)
This is a good idea. Your problem is that this isn't the story you're currently writing. I think the part about the murder trial is important to focus on. Think about how your anomaly affects your characters rather than about what the anomaly does in general. Could you perhaps follow the mother's story, beyond as a device to tell you what the anomaly does?
I hope that helps.
Meanwhile, their average age is only one year, unlike most turtles,
The average lifespan of SCP-XXXX instances is 1 (one) year.
Foundation site
"Site" should be capitalised (in all instances)
It's kind of slow at the beginning and I didn't really understand what the turtles were doing but the pacing speeds up later on and the ending is good.
I'm presuming the Moneda Event is some sort of large-scale catastropy, but you should probably specify that somewhere (since you mention it basically immediately but don't explain what it is).
I'm not super invested in this to be honest.
Your anomaly is a humanoid with 1) corrosive blood, 2) super-fast healing, and 3) shapeshifting(?), which isn't particularly interesting on its own. I thought the interview logs might build a narrative but it really only tells the reader things they already know. I would recommend thinking about this like a regular story. How does your anomaly react to the Foundation? How do the Foundation react to your anomaly? How do they interact with each other? What's the conflict? How does your story end? Etc.
I also recommend making an ideas forum thread and seeking greenlights, even if it's just because it makes seeking critique easier.
Is your ACS a placeholder? Because Safe, Dark, Notice, Level 5, doesn't seem right for your anomaly.
The proofreading isn't the problem here; the problem is that you don't have a narrative. The narrative needs to be across your entire article. Think about a situation your anomaly is involved in, and write a story surrounding it. The Foundation need to feature too, since how they interact with your anomaly is more important than what the anomaly actually does. And take your time! You don't need to rush into it.
2901/02/14
Is this date correct?
the full document can be found from Site-847
"the full document is stored at Site-847."
Who knew food actually tastes something!
"Who knew food actually tastes of (??) something!"
Did you know that Dottir means 'daughter' in German?
It's not German, it's Icelandic.
Tone is off in the second half of the description.
The diary entries work to further the narrative but the interview feels a little out of place? The ending is abrupt, not narrative-wise, but with your pacing. The diary entries move very fast, which is fine, but then your ending is really blunt. You also don't really explain the actual cause of Somya's death, or relate back to it. I presume it has something to do with Stefanie, but you never explain how or why.
All traces of SCP-XXXX has been removed.
"All traces of SCP-XXXX have been removed."
The body and diary found during SCP-XXXX investigation has been buried and is currently stored in a standard Foundation locker.
"The body found during SCP-XXXX investigation has been buried and the diary is currently stored in a standard Foundation locker." (this wording is still weird but it's better than it was)
quickly grew around the dormitory
"quickly" breaks clinical tone. "rapidly" might work better.
At the center of the house is a body covered in rose thorns. Genetic analysis reveal this to be the body of Somya Tennyson, drained of blood.
"Genetic analysis revealed the exsanguinated body, found entangled in rose thorns at the center of the house, to be that of Somya Tennyson."
Foundation Agent Samuel found a diary belonging to Somya.
"Foundation Agent Samuel found a diary belonging to Tennyson." (refer to people using their last names)
As the diary gives information about the anomalous event, excerpts of it are found below, however, the full document can be retrieved from Site-847
"relevant excerpts". also needs a full stop/period at the end.
I'll just hope that I am able to listen to class then!
"I just hope that I'm able to listen to class too!"
I haven't been sleeping well today
"I haven't been sleeping well recently"
I was expecting no one to give me gifts, but a lot of people gave me a lot of gifts!
"I was expecting no one to give me gifts, but a lot of people did!"
why did she even talked to me?
"why did she even talk to me?"
The diary logs are much more coherent (even though Somya is deteriorating) and the narrative progression is good, but I still don't understand why Somya dies. It seems non-anomalous to be honest, and unless she made the flowers grow on purpose until she died, it doesn't really make sense.
Other than you mentioning in the description that it was an anomalous event, it just seems like a tragic love story. Even just mentioning why it's anomalous and how it happened would fix that.
surrounding the death of SCP-5548-1 and SCP-5548
"surrounding SCP-5548 and the death of SCP-5548-1"
donations he been– well non-existent
"donations have been– well non-existent"
The research notes of Mr. Davis
"Mr. Davis' research notes"
I feel like it ends kind of abruptly? Like, he dies, but then what? Other than that, which I think is more my personal opinion than an actual issue with your writing, it looks good.
with the phrase, EXSVRGE DOMINE
"with the phrase EXSVRGE DOMINE" (also is it meant to be a V? I know that U is written as V in Latin but idk if it works here.)
Move the second footnote to after EXSVRGE DOMINE rather than at the end of the sentence.
with a low-ceiling, forcing the occupants
"with a low-ceiling, which forces the occupants"
The floor of SCP-XXXX is littered in human bones.
"The floor of SCP-XXXX is littered with human bones."
Iconoclasts, may you live in interesting times.
"Iconoclasts" is a nice touch but it makes the sentence clunky.
Overall it's still good, but significantly less mysterious than the last draft I saw. I know people were having issues with understanding the meaning in the previous draft, but this time you seem to have stepped away from the mystery without actually making it any easier to decipher the meaning.
Respectfully, it doesn't feel like your writing. It just… feels too clinical for something the Foundation abandoned.
You said at some point about taking away too much detail ("negative space" are the words that come to mind) but here you've gone too far in the opposite direction, imo.
Things I Liked
1) ConProcs. They are good. 10/10
2) "Arise O'Lord". This is just in reference to the overall theme. *shrugs*
3) "prostrate position". Nice double meaning there. Having been inside a burial mound I can confirm you do very often end up lying on the floor, and it also references praying. Very nice.
4) "It now lays destroyed and disfigured, covered in a thin layer of dust." Reminds me of Ozymandias. Fall from power and all that. Serves its purpose.
5) The entire addendum. It is simulataneously in clinical tone and it feels… old? But in a good way.
6) "May you live in interesting times". I love this ending. I personally think it works better without "iconoclasts" but that's mainly because I had to google the meaning of iconoclast, in comparison to the first draft where I was just sitting there like "wow holy shit".
I didn't pick up that you were trying to emulate other people (other than the crosslink to kaktus' work, which at the time felt like a reference as in "this thing here is a similar idea" rather than "i am trying to write in a similar style to this piece of writing").
bearing in mind i've only read five pieces of your work (apostasy, with their legs tied up in knots, take me to the moor, the traitor's libel, and the clown ranch thing). I was mostly basing my crit this time on the previous apostasy draft, and on take me to the moor, because they have similar vibes, but idk if that's what you were going for here.
the part that felt out of place was the part in the collapsible that wasn't the addendum (i guess that's part of the description?). Writing it in the same way as you wrote the addendum would make it seem more in the same time, rather than seeming like the Foundation were writing in the present day about something they abandoned before they even started.
Anomalies in the custody of the SCP Foundation are referred to by a random three or four digit number for organizational purposes.
The numbers aren't random in-universe.
The class between Euclid and Apollyon.
Keter is the class between Euclid and Thaumiel. Apollyon is esoteric.
This means that anomaly in question is very difficult to contain, but not necessarily dangerous to human life or normalcy.
Remove the part about danger, or reword it. Don't correlate Keter and danger at all.
This section of the document describes the anomaly itself, often its physical characteristics as well as its anomalous effects.
"This section of the document describes the physical characteristics of the anomaly, as well as its anomalous effects."
SCP-XXXX is an anomalous phenomenon in which random pages in the SCP Foundation database are edited to include footnotes
"random" breaks clinical tone.
In some cases SCP-XXXX events have occurred in paper documents, replicating the ink used in the page.
"In some cases, SCP-XXXX events have occurred in paper documents, replicating the ink used in the page."
Blackboxes are used to cover up sensitive information. In this case, the blackbox was used because Scott Wilkins requested to not have his name associated with the creation of a keter anomaly.
"Blackboxes are used to cover up sensitive information. In this case, the blackbox was used because Scott Wilkins requested to not have his name associated with the creation of a Keter anomaly."
Meant as a low effort pun on the term "crystal clear" and the human name Crystal.
"Meant as a low effort pun on the term "crystal clear"."
colour based anomaly codes
"colour-based anomaly codes" Also do you mean "threat levels"? If so, you could mention that threat levels are typically used in INT branches.
A complex image that, when viewed, causes an autonomous reaction in the viewer.
"autonomous" doesn't feel like the right word here?
Numerous new staff member struggle to understand the complex scientific language used by the SCP Foundation.
"Numerous new staff members struggle to understand the complex scientific language used by the SCP Foundation."
An AIC is incapable of acting against the commands of its operators.
This feels kind of out of place. Is it referencing the fact that the AIC doesn't know what "unneeded definition" means? If so, why is it not defining every word?
and SCP-XXXX events began to occur in other Foundation documents.
"began to occur" breaks clinical tone.
LBL
Medical thaumaturges were able to stabilize the remaining two victims by replacing the entire volume of their circulatory system, although not before they had already suffered neurological damage.
Replacing the volume of their circulatory system with what? The wording is kinda clunky here.
Bastille Day is a popular holiday throughout Three Portlands; not coincidentally, more misdemeanors and public order crimes occur on the weekend of Bastille Day than any other three-day period in the months of June, July, and August.
Reads like a Wikipedia article (i.e. general fact rather than specific information the UIU is telling the reader). Tone is different from the following sentence.
With most resources presently tied-up in responding to Bastille Day incidents, the Three Portlands Police Department has requested that the Unusual Incidents Unit assume responsibility for the investigation of the overdoses at Deer College.
Are the overdoses at Deer College not part of the Bastille Day incidents? Deleting all the words before the comma would make the wording more concise.
Security cameras are absent in most areas of Three Portlands due to public opinion; as such, identifying suspects may be difficult.
"public opinion"?
[Mumbling and ectoplasmic slopping is heard as Quinn Law performs the nekyia.]
Should it not be "Agent Law"?
There is a possibility of a full recovery for the five students, pending communications with parallel Deer College faculty.
I only have a superficial understanding of Deer College but weren't three of them dead already? Also what does "parallel" mean in "parallel Deer College faculty"? Edit: You don't mention the students beyond this point except in relations to the overdoses in general in the Final Analysis; therefore this section feels irrelevant because it's never concluded.
[No. 531’s mouth stretches backwards in a facsimile of a smile, and its eye-fire flickers]
"eye-fire" isn't a word I'm familiar with. Clarifying it or replacing it with "eyes" might be better.
[No. 531 nods jutteringly.]
"jutteringly" is not a word.
[No. 531’s irregular movements ceased, turning its head to meet Rackley and Quinn, and its eye-fires brightened.]
"Rackley and Quinn" should be "Rackley and Law"
Quickly, Mobile Occult Operations Team (MOOT) units and 3PPD officers moved to cordon off the bar and the surrounding area.
I know it's UIU format but I can't help thinking "Mobile Occult Operations Team (MOOT) units and 3PPD officers quickly moved to cordon off the bar and the surrounding area" would be better phrasing. "Promptly" could also replace "quickly".
MOOT operatives were equipped with standard MOOT gear, thaumaturgically-enhanced bulletproof vests, combat-rated exoskeletons, targeting runes painted onto the backs of their helmets, and ambient EVE accumulators. The MOOT were instructed to shoot to incapacitate, and arrest if able. MOOT operatives were to be deployed into the building, rappelling onto the rooftop and through the skylight via helicopter.
^^^ this is the first place I noticed it but it's probably elsewhere too. If you're using Oxford commas, use them consistently.
A top priority of the mission was to ensure no civilian or operative casualties.
You mention this but also detail operative casualties in the operational report and then label the mission a success. Doesn't seem right.
Paranarcotic, temporal, addictive, Deer College, Prometheus Labs, Marshall, Carter, and Dark Ltd., Lighthouse Mafia
I'm not sure where Prometheus Labs or MCD come into this?
Overall
Why is your sandbox a collab?
Overall it's really good. My only concern beyond the stuff I mentioned in the LBL is that the pacing is weird in places. You alternate between fast and slow pacing and it's quite jarring at times. For example, the first interview is very fast paced and works beautifully, but "Current Status" in the tab after it is much slower and seems kind of irrelevant? "Leads" in the same tab has much faster pacing in comparison.
LBL
Item must be kept a secret, and all individuals who discover it are to be killed.
"Killed" is incredibly blunt. It's the right word but not typically used by the Foundation. "Terminated" would be more in accordance with the Foundation's way of speaking. (Unless this is an existing esoteric class, in which case disregard.)
MTF γ-78
Don't know how I feel about this. Typically MTF designations are shortened using Latin letters rather than Greek (e.g. MTF Rho-2 shortens to MTF R-2). Like, do what you want, but using Greek letters can ruin the pacing.
When SCP-XXXX is under Foundation custody, attempts are to be made to ensure that the method to access the anomaly is restricted only to individuals within the Foundation.
This is kind of a given? The Foundation, by default, don't provide information about their anomalies to GoIs/non-Foundation people. It's also implied by the Object Class.
SCP-XXXX is a perfect replica of the Mexica altepetl of Tenochtitlan as it was in late November 1519.
"late November of 1519" might work better; it's a pacing thing.
The majority of the four zones of SCP-XXXX is accessible to the general public, with the only areas restricted to the original population.
"the only areas"? I feel like you might be missing a word and/or need to reword the sentence here.
Beyond the city, in Lake Texcoco and the coast, Hernan Cortés' forces can be seen, which consisted of thirteen ships, horsemen, and foot soldiers.
"consists of"
These forces constantly patrol SCP-XXXX, but never come closer than 5km to SCP-XXXX.
"These forces constantly patrol, but never come closer than 5km to SCP-XXXX." or "These forces constantly patrol the area, but never come closer than 5km to SCP-XXXX."
Once SCP-XXXX is under Foundation control, Class-A amnestics are to be administered to the populace of Mexico City and the surrounding area. Non-anomalous members of Los Ratones who are captured are to be administered Class F amnestics and released into the general public. Captured Anomalous members of Los Ratones are to be administered both Class-C and Class-G amnestics, with a focus on the events of Operation 1521 and the existence of SCP-XXXX. These members are then to be released in or near known anomalous communities.
Be consistent with amnestic class hyphenations (Class-F vs Class F). Why Class C and Class G? If the memories aren't existent anymore, there's no way to make them seem non-existent. Why are they released in anomalous communities? Should the Foundation not contain them if they are anomalous?
Multiple documents from multiple groups have been recovered referring to SCP-XXXX.
Are you planning on writing more documents for Addendum XXXX.2? If not, remove this sentence.
Overall
I recommend asking Limeyy to crit this if you haven't already because he knows a lot about Aztecs. Also Cyvstvi (/hj) because this is esoteric (jokes aside, they're a good critter).
Your clinical tone is not great in places. Your description feels like a Tale rather than a skip description. Cut out all repeated and/or irrelevant information.
Be consistent with your Oxford commas etc etc.
Overall, you've got a lot going on. I like the narrative and the conclusion, but I think you focus too much on describing the pocket dimension when most of it is irrelevant to the story. Even Los Ratones aren't relevant in the end, despite being mentioned a lot before the second addendum.
“Collect your Color”
"Collect Your Color"
However, Xing's design decision to have the losing players slowly lose their ability to see
The alliteration here feels clunky. Maybe change to "Xing's decision to have".
His new “dream game” Escape from Your Deepest Fears is scheduled to hit shelves in under a week.
"Escape From Your Deepest Fears". + "under a week" feels vague; maybe change to "this week".
Wandsman: Thank you for agreeing to meet with me today.
Does your Wandsman have a name?
Xing: Well It’s been a long time since I’ve been able to talk about my work with anyone who genuinely wanted to listen.
"Xing: Well, it’s been a long time since I’ve been able to talk about my work with anyone who genuinely wanted to listen."
Wandsman: You refer of course to the SCP Foundation?
"Wandsman: You refer, of course, to the SCP Foundation?"
damaged by them rather than improved.
"damaged by them, rather than improved."
Xing: If she wants a game without any strategy there’s always Candyland.
"Xing: If she wants a game without any strategy there’s always Candyland."
The title Escape from Your Deepest Fears sounds like a horror game
"The title Escape From Your Deepest Fears sounds like a horror game".
Wandsman: … fair enough.
"Wandsman: … Fair enough."
made my way through many primal fears like darkness and claustraphobia
"made my way through many primal fears such as darkness and claustrophobia"
I bumped into an image of my mother who has been dead for centuries, begging me to not abandon her as she was buried under a pile of my previous review articles.
"I bumped into an image of my mother, who has been dead for centuries, begging me to not abandon her as she was buried under a pile of my previous review articles."
not only is a regret like that off theme
"not only is a regret like that off-theme"
I love this so much. Really great GoI format, pacing is fantastic, some minor SPaG stuff (above) but nothing major.
Any civilians caught attempting to enter SCP-XXXX
"Any civilians found attempting to enter SCP-XXXX"
These caverns, which appear to descend kilometres into the earth, have not been fully mapped and are illuminated by an unknown species of bioluminescent foliage.
"which appear to descend" should probably be "which descend". The Foundation don't guess things and all that.
reminiscent of the ruins located near the place where they began
I still don't understand this but if it's something that's important to your narrative and most people would understand it's a reference to 4k then go for it I guess.
If viewed from above, SCP-XXXX would resemble a solar cross.
"When viewed from above, SCP-XXXX resembles a solar cross."
SCP-XXXX-A has been confirmed to be a complex scrying device intended to deliver divine revelations to the singular occupant.
"SCP-XXXX-A is a complex scrying device intended to deliver divine revelations to the singular occupant."
In particular, a necessary component was removed from SCP-XXXX-A rendering it inoperable.
The footnote here may well spoil the ending. I understand you're trying to foreshadow the ending but I don't think the footnote is needed.
held court with the greatest minds of the Fae just a Moon’s Fleeting Journey before Writing.
"held court with the greatest minds of the Fae just a Moon’s Fleeting Journey Before Writing." - "Before" was capitalised in the date box and should also be capitalised here too.
Date: A Day Before Writing
Feels inconsistent. If the writer knows what a day is, why does the first tablet not say "Eight Days Before Writing"?
“What manner of people worshiped you?”
"What manner of people worshipped you?"
“One final question, Nzaadak Cthali! Are you free from the Eternal Oblivion in your realm!”
Should this be a question?
it was dragged back into the rent of the earth
Is it not "rend of the earth"?
This artifact is not some simply “scrying device”
"This artifact is not simply some “scrying device”;"
Shifting the relevance back towards SCP-XXXX-A or the Orrey
"Orrery"
Following its reactivation, a thaumaturgical ritual, overseen by members of the Alchemy Division commenced.
" Following its reactivation, a thaumaturgical ritual, overseen by members of the Alchemy Division, commenced."
SCP-XXXX-1
Is SCP-XXXX-1 the same entity from the God of the Epoch of Dragons entry or is it just similar? I noticed their names were different and I wasn't sure if that was intentional.
Dr. Victoria Takemi: What manner of people worshipped you?
Should probably just say "Dr Takemi"; we already know their name is Victoria.
Overall, I like it. I'm not ~entirely~ sure what actually happens or what any of it really means but I do like the underlying metaphor, the wording of which alludes me. Would upvote with righteous confusion.
eh, not feeling it tbh. i get it's broken masquerade but it's not immediately obvious without the theme. even when you consider that they're tweeting, it feels weird.
Also, the content itself is kind of nonsensical? Like, why are users encouraged to think of their mother's maiden name (when that's a security risk) but not other things? Why is the anomaly neutralised if the tweet trends?
(also sqyd's challenge is supposedly 280 characters in the source code which means that the display name, handle, and date count towards the word count. arguably, so does the div box code.)
09:12 <Undercover_Fly> Ticonderoga means 'cannot be contained, but does not require containment'.
09:12 <Undercover_Fly> Which I suppose works for this.
09:12 <Whomstdveworm> Oh, fascinating, I've never heard of that classification.
09:12 <Undercover_Fly> Then again, it does require containment.
09:12 <TawnyOwlJones> ticonderoga is "can't be contained but doesn't need to be". cernunnos is "can be contained but isn't due to ethical or logical reasons"
09:13 <DoctorJuhan> This list has all object classes https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/esoteric-classes-complete-list
A Comprehensive List of Esoteric Classes - SCP Foundation
09:14 <Undercover_Fly> This is more, 'we want to contain it, but we can't. However it poses a minimal threat to secrecy and in entirely immobile'
09:15 <TawnyOwlJones> Undercover_Fly: why can't the foundation contain it?
09:15 <Undercover_Fly> The foundation can't contain it due to it being located at the gravitational center of the earth. Also, it's intangible.
09:15 <DoctorJuhan> Im sorry all people, i got zoom coming up
09:16 <DoctorJuhan> bye
09:16 <TawnyOwlJones> *logistical reasons, not logical. don't do SPaG too early in the morning i guess
09:16 <TawnyOwlJones> hmm
09:17 <Undercover_Fly> Simultaneously, this anomaly is the result of a phenomenon that has no singular source or cause, and therefore cannot be contained or neutralised in of itself.
09:17 <Undercover_Fly> http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-14042200/intangible-mass-at-the-center-of-the-earth#post-4948651
Intangible mass at the center of the Earth - SCP Foundation
09:18 <Undercover_Fly> My idea. As you can see, the class is a tricky one.
09:19 <TawnyOwlJones> if you want to subscribe to NSEKT orthodoxy, Keter might work (and then you detail why it's uncontainable in the conprocs) but there's probably something more specific.
09:20 <Undercover_Fly> It's uncontained, yet it's not keter because you can leave it along and it won't breach. It's self-containing.
09:20 <TawnyOwlJones> yeah, you're basically doing that already except your object class says Safe instead of Keter
09:20 <TawnyOwlJones> hmm okay
09:20 <TawnyOwlJones> one second
09:21 <TawnyOwlJones> if it's self-containing, is it not contained?
09:22 <Undercover_Fly> I mean the problem is that as soon as something becomes part of the anomaly, it's contained.
09:22 <Undercover_Fly> Yet you can't stop things becoming part of the anomalu.
09:22 <Undercover_Fly> *anomaly
09:25 <Undercover_Fly> The anomaly is simultaneously an active threat and not an active threat.
09:26 <TawnyOwlJones> hmm you could use "self-contained"? but that's creating your own esoteric class
09:27 <Undercover_Fly> I mean, maybe 'Hiemal' at a stretch
09:28 <TawnyOwlJones> object class doesn't have anything to do with danger. there's something used in INT branches called "threat level" but i don't know if it applies here
09:28 <Undercover_Fly> If you say that the two sides are intangibility and gravity.
09:28 <TawnyOwlJones> eh, hiemal is two distinct anomalies, not two parts of one anomaly
09:29 <Undercover_Fly> Technically its 'a system of two or more distinct but related anomalies that keep each other under control'
09:29 <Undercover_Fly> But that's really a stretch in this context.
09:29 <TawnyOwlJones> yeah, but your anomaly being intangible doesn't make it two anomalies. it's a massive stretch
09:30 <Undercover_Fly> I was implying that the anomalies were intangibility and gravity. But yes, that's a stretch.
09:30 <TawnyOwlJones> oh, okay sorry
09:31 <TawnyOwlJones> i'm going through the classes to see if there's something that fits better but i'm not getting very far
09:32 <TawnyOwlJones> if you're only looking at the foundation's perspective, maybe "uncontainable"?
09:32 <Undercover_Fly> Maybe we could have it be Safe (SCP-XXXX-1-1 instances are considered self-containing)
09:33 <TawnyOwlJones> but is it still Safe if the Foundation aren't containing it themselves? maybe Euclid
09:33 <Undercover_Fly> Yeah, split the difference. I've got to got now, I'll see if we can continue this conversation later.
09:34 <TawnyOwlJones> of course
SCP-5709 is allowed limited travel of Site-120
Why though? Is it just a psychological thing?
Security Level 3/GENERAL
Conflicts with the following sentence about being "high-ranking".
high-ranking Foundation staff
"high-ranking" is vague. Specify a security clearance level. EDIT: this is maybe okay, since the main issue is that the Foundation are trying to kill SCP-5709 while also considering it to be high-ranking staff?
SCP-5709 is a white young adult male
"SCP-5709 is a white, young adult male"
SCP-5709 had claimed to have gotten
"SCP-5709 claimed to have been"
A curated list of realities that SCP-5709 has accessed is available within Document 5709-00
Is it not "Addendum 5709.1"?
How SCP-5709 knew this is unknown.
The crosslink here doesn't lead to anything.
Subject was found wearing a metal suit of unknown make, seemingly designed to enhance the punching capabilities of the wearer. Currently held within Area-34's Low-Security Storage.
Is this meant to imply that SCP-5709 stole the suit from Area-34 or that SCP-5709 found it and the Foundation retrieved it afterwards?
a tank of carbon dioxide.
The external link here doesn't really make sense here. What lines are you trying to draw between SCP-5709 and S.M.? There's a link in the linked article about carbon dioxide inhalation, but that's not what you describe in your article.
There's a lot of problems with your clinical tone, mostly pertaining to having excess words in your sentences. Cut out any repetition and anything unneeded.
Your description is very dense. There's stuff you mention in your description that you don't carry into your addenda. The second paragraph especially is confusing; what is meant here by "disturbing the peace"?
In regards to the overall tone of the article, it changes a lot. It's really reliant on the last addendum; the conprocs and description are kind of boring and contradict each other a lot, and the first addendum, while well-written, seems disjointed in places. The tone working well and the story making sense are both completely contingent on reading to the end and probably then re-reading, which isn't really what you should be aiming for?
The last addendum is terrifying. I am scared of literally nothing but that is making my skin crawl. I have one concern about the last addendum: why are they trying to kill SCP-5709? Remember that the Foundation doesn't like destroying its anomalies; inducing fear and severe trauma for the sake of studying an anomaly is different to straight-up decommissioning it.
Overall, it was very difficult to start reading but the story is actually really good and I love the ending. It definitely needs tightening up/overhauling in places; e.g. when you mention Procedure-5709 in the description it seems like multiple events but in the last addendum it seems like one event. Start at the end and work backwards.
Were you planning on adding anything else? I remember you said yesterday that it wasn't finished. Once you've finished I'm happy to LBL it in full if you'd like.
thaumaturgically trained
"thaumaturgically-trained"
SCP-5316-1 is to be kept in a Euclid level storage locker
It should probably just say "SCP-5316-1 is to be kept in a storage locker". Is SCP-5316-1 not Safe class?
currently banished
"currently-banished"
SCP-5316 used to have teleportation abilities
Breaks clinical tone. Not sure how to rephrase it though.
his Map of the Multiverse
"its Map of the Multiverse"
I'm torn on these two paragraphs:
When wound, the next sapient being the winder sees is compelled to sit down in front of the winder and answer any question the winder asks of them to the best of their knowledge for the duration of the song.
During the song, those questioned by the winder are unable to move or otherwise take any actions that would harm the questioner. The winder on the other hand may perform any actions they wish to the being questioned. There is currently no known method to counter this effect completely, but evidence suggests that mind effecting drugs such as tetrahydrocannabinol are able to cause the responses given to the winder to be less coherent.
On one hand they say what you want them to say. On the other hand, they are lengthy and I had to read them several times to understand what was said. Maybe consider cutting down anything excess.
<Dr. Varadkar Sits down.>
"<Dr. Varadkar sits down.>"
<Kassar leaves.>
Might be worth mentioning that it leaves the office specifically. It's not a massive issue but it feels disjointed atm.
Mechanites
"Mekhanites" (presuming you're referring to Sarkicism?)
<Kassar enters Hadid's bedroom via apportation>
"<Kassar enters Hadid's bedroom via apportation.>"
Kassar picks up the boy's limp hand
"Kassar picks up Hadid's limp hand"
Chelon four
"Chelon-4"
You're not on the streets of Milwaukee anymore baby sister.
"You're not on the streets of Milwaukee anymore, baby sister."
Alright I've had quite enough of your posturing brother, what Machiavellian nonsense did you throw at the Editors to convince them alienating ourselves from our most desperately needed allies was a good idea?
"Alright, I've had quite enough of your posturing, brother. What Machiavellian nonsense did you throw at the Editors to convince them alienating ourselves from our most desperately-needed allies was a good idea?"
Oh, but we're not going to alienate anyone exalted Arbiter.
"Oh, but we're not going to alienate anyone, exalted Arbiter."
Note by Agent Briggs: Considering this information, I strongly recommend SCP-5316 be elevated to Keter class and given a non-standard designation. It cannot be allowed to keep its plan in motion.
Note by Director Nakamura: Denied for now. Your heart and head are both in the right place Briggs, but we have no idea what changing this thing's name will do to it. We also don't have confirmation of where that letter came from, and we don't even know if this SCP's thaumaturgy theories are accurate.
For now we just need to contain this monster as best as we can, and let the researchers come up with better locks for its door.
I recommend putting these in blockquotes; they look out of place on their own. Emails could also work., rather than notes on the document.
16:47 <Shade> Hewwo?
16:47 <TawnyOwlJones> Hi! sorry i'm just reading your draft again, one second :)
16:48 <Shade> Okie
16:52 <TawnyOwlJones> Overall, your drafts are one article and I can see you having to cut out quite a lot of stuff when you get down to looking for draft crit, but it's not something you need to do yet unless you want to.
16:52 <TawnyOwlJones> You also really need to read How To Write An SCP again. Stuff like specifying measurements when they aren't necessary, excessive blackboxing, lack of clinical tone, etc are all problems. They're also easily fixable.
16:52 <TawnyOwlJones> What is the blue text meant to signify?
16:52 <TawnyOwlJones> I think it was mainly interviews that you were worried about, right? Interviews are just a conversation, so imagine the skips monologuing the answers, and then create the questions around that. With Celeri's interview, what is it that you're trying to tell the readers?
16:53 <Shade> How he's still guilty about Mozart's death and how he's constantly blaming himself for "killing" him
16:56 <TawnyOwlJones> okay. so you can express that through body language (remember that cat and human body languages are different) and through words. Ultimately, you also need Celeri to talk in the interview, which I think is where you're stuck rn. Could you maybe have Celeri explain the circumstances of Mozart's death as well as just being generally guilty about it?
16:56 <Shade> Ohhhhhhh
16:56 <TawnyOwlJones> you good?
16:56 <Shade> Yeah
16:57 <Shade> I can combine cat and human body languages with this one, right?
16:57 <TawnyOwlJones> yeah, of course
16:57 <Shade> Noice
16:57 <Shade> I already have an idea with Mozzy's
16:58 <Shade> Like, he get asked about any stuff he remembers in his death and then he hears about the rumour, which upsets him
16:58 <Shade> And then he gets told about how it impacted Celeri
17:00 <TawnyOwlJones> with the interviews, they aren't just snapshots in time, they need to show progression too. So for Celeri's interview you can keep the generic setting stuff at the beginning, lead into the circumstances of mozart's death, and then lead into the rumour, and then celeri's reaction (most of which can probably be noted in the closing statement).
17:00 <TawnyOwlJones> that's a good idea, for mozzy's interview, i mean
17:00 <Shade> Ohhhhhh
17:01 <Shade> So I kinda gotta rework Celeri's?
17:01 <TawnyOwlJones> not rework it, per se, just note how you're going to bring it forward
17:02 <Shade> Ohhh, aighty
17:02 <Shade> So for the other stuff, what can I do to make it more clinical
17:03 <TawnyOwlJones> you're focusing too much on questions and answers, and it's making you not write anything because you don't understand how to phrase it, i think. write celeri's part, and then separate it and insert the questions.
17:03 <TawnyOwlJones> you mean clinical tone? there's guides for that, one second
17:04 <Shade> Also, what do I need to cut off?
17:10 <TawnyOwlJones> struggling to find the guides btw i thought i had them saved, please stand by
17:10 <TawnyOwlJones> it's not so much cutting off as much as cutting down. merging it into one page might help because it'll trim down irrelevant/repeated information (like the measurement in your conprocs, your conprocs themselves, and most of your descriptions). You've also got some conprocs in your descriptions. I also recommend separating the archived containment
17:10 <TawnyOwlJones> procedures into a collapsible above the current conprocs.
17:10 <TawnyOwlJones> I think it's really a case of reorganising and seeing what you can reword or scrap entirely.
17:11 <Shade> What are conprocs?
17:12 <TawnyOwlJones> containment procedures
17:12 <Shade> Ohhhhhhhhhhh
17:17 <TawnyOwlJones> http://www.scpwiki.com/clinical-tone-declassified
Clinical Tone: Declassified - SCP Foundation
17:17 <TawnyOwlJones> http://www.scpwiki.com/clinical-vs-complex
Clinical vs Complex - SCP Foundation
17:17 <TawnyOwlJones> these are a good start. I had a ton more, some of which were off-site ones, but I can't find the links. If I find them I'll send them over.
17:17 <TawnyOwlJones> Getting really tight clinical tone is mostly a result of getting tons of crit and reading a lot of skips, but the basics can and should be formed first.
17:17 <Shade> Okie
17:23 <Shade> Anything else?
17:24 <TawnyOwlJones> i don't think so, unless you have anything else to say. like, this isn't an in-depth draft crit or anything, i just remembered you wanted help with the interviews and decided to pick up on some other stuff too.
17:24 <Shade> Oh okie
17:26 <TawnyOwlJones> :)
17:28 <Shade> So, how about I make a combined article and then two separate articles that are archived?
17:28 <TawnyOwlJones> explain?
17:30 <Shade> There will be tabs and the current article will have the containment procedures and the descriptions of both skips in one place?
17:30 <Shade> The archived ones are in the other tabs
17:30 <Shade> Would that work????
17:31 <TawnyOwlJones> the conprocs and the descriptions are the same for each skip though. or very similar. I just don't really see the point?
17:32 <TawnyOwlJones> functionally, celeri and mozzarella are two instances of the same object. you can tell both their stories in one article. if you want to tell them separately, you probably can, but it's harder logistically, and their stories overlap so heavily that separating them kinda kills it? having extra articles for them in different tabs means reading the
17:32 <TawnyOwlJones> same story three times, if that makes sense?
17:33 <Shade> Hm, I see
17:33 <TawnyOwlJones> like, do what you want. disagree with me, ask other critters. but that's my opinion
17:34 <Shade> Aighty
17:35 <TawnyOwlJones> :)
17:35 <Shade> So, one article for them?
17:36 <TawnyOwlJones> i would recommend it. their conprocs are the same, and you can use archived conprocs to note the change. their descriptions can be one description. and then have each of their interviews in separate addenda.
17:37 <TawnyOwlJones> you have anything else to say?
17:38 <Shade> Sure their descriptions are *nearly* similar, but they still are like kinda different in terms of fur color and floof?
17:40 <TawnyOwlJones> yeah, but you can use "SCP-XXXX are catboys. SCP-XXXX-A is [description]. SCP-XXXX-B is [description]". obviously in more detail than that, but a lot of the information is repeated or paraphrased and we don't need to read it twice. also with humanoid objects, don't describe them physically too much, it's usually unimportant.
17:40 <Shade> Aighty
17:41 <Shade> So, describe their similarities firs before their differences?
17:41 <Shade> *first
17:41 <TawnyOwlJones> yes
17:41 <Shade> Okie
17:43 <TawnyOwlJones> mostly the differences will be in their emotional reactions to things and their personalities rather than their physical appearance. you can mention their appearances but don't dwell on it particularly long, and also be clinical with their emotions.
17:45 <Shade> So more focus on personalities rather than the appearance?
17:46 <TawnyOwlJones> yeah. anything you mention beyond basic information should have an impact on the story.
17:46 <Shade> Aighty
17:47 <TawnyOwlJones> their appearance might be important, and you should briefly mention it in the description because it sets celeri and mozzy apart, but it shouldn't be dragged on for the entire article, if that makes sense? (i don't think you're going to drag it on, but just limit it a bit)
17:48 <Shade> Ohhh okie
17:49 <Shade> Mention that Mozzy has longer fur and is cream colored while Celeri is short-furred and is black in color?
17:49 <Shade> And also, Celeri's beard whenever he has it?
17:50 <TawnyOwlJones> yeah, if you want to
17:51 <Shade> Okie
17:52 <TawnyOwlJones> i have to go eat, but if you have any more questions then either wikidot pm them or throw them in a pastebin and .tell them to me and i'll pick them up when i'm next online.
17:52 <Shade> Okie
17:52 <Shade> cya
17:52 <TawnyOwlJones> :)
The area around SCP-XXXXX
"The area around SCP-XXXX"
Any citizen found approaching SCP-XXXX are to be removed from the premises.
"Any citizen found approaching SCP-XXXX is to be removed from the premises." or "Any citizens found approaching SCP-XXXX are to be removed from the premises." "Civilian" might be a better word?
a wire made out of an indeterminate material.
"a wire made from an indeterminate material." "Constructed" might also work.
Although SCP-XXXX-B shows severe signs of malnutrition, it is currently unknown how it does not decompose.
This seems like two different sentences? They don't quite connect. Also switch this sentence with the last one in the paragraph.
However, said investigation was not followed through due to a lack of evidence.
It kind of contradicts the previous sentence. Why mention the case being reopened if they never found anything? Surely they would need new evidence in order to reopen the case in the first place?
[With permission from Site-901 Director Damaso, Researcher Jun was permitted to use his expertise in Maxwellist religion to form a connection with SCP-XXXX-B.]
I think move this to the Prologue. It seems out of place here.
The food there's pretty nice too.
"The food there's pretty nice."
it it's not occupied.
"if it's not occupied."
Money's not a problem their either
"Money's not a problem there either"
Wish I can revisit it again.
"Wish I could visit it again."
while attempting to reconnect to SCP-XXXX-B
Should this say "SCP-XXXX-A"?
My condolences, SCP-XXXX.
"My condolences, SCP-XXXX-B."
Sigh.
If this is in a terminal, is it possible to have this as a note (like a /me) above the sentence rather than in the sentence? It seems a little out of place where it is rn.
Resarcher Jun
"Researcher Jun"
Further attempts at communicating to SCP-XXXX-B only results in this message appearing.
"All further attempts at communicating with SCP-XXXX-B result in the appearance of this message."
In addition, devices that connect to SCP-XXXX-A becomes part of SCP-XXXX-A and will extend its range. Currently, there are 3 devices conencted to SCP-XXXX-A, extending its range to 2 meters.
This seems tacked on, rather than part of the narrative. It doesn't seem important becaue it wasn't mentioned prior and isn't mentioned afterwards. Honestly thinking it would work better to just remove those two sentences. That being said, then the reclassification doesn't make sense. Why is it important to reclassify it to Keter?
accesible through the address wansparadise.com
"accessible through the address wansparadise.com"
