I'm new here, so new you can still smell the aproval letter from Dr. Bright. (I'd say kind of like new car, but with a hint of banana) Anyways, I have an idea for an SCP and I'd like to post it. I'm wondeirng if I should get some feedback first or just chuck it out there for all to see. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thank you!
Okay, Rough draft of SCP should be here http://scpsandbox2.wikidot.com/beeburger-s-page
Ouchie. I hate to be harsh, but this needs some major work.
I found these lines to be lacking the correct tone or clinical terminology:
"SCP-### can be relatively contained simply by keeping everyone from entering the top floor."
"An armed guard remains at the elevator at all times, though he/she never rides it."
"On average, it is believed the local population travels to the building, around six or seven an hour."
“affordable but quite spacious.” (just reverse "affordable" and "spacious" and you should be good.)
"The West wall consists of a large circuit board with thirty-nine (39) glass eyes, twenty-six (26) artificial hearts, and one-hundred-sixty-nine (169) false teeth." (explain more about this. Are they inlaid? Super-glued on? even "attached" would work. Nice job on the numbering, though.)
"The South wall is a series of stone tablets and statues embedded within a copper wall." (be specific.)
"When first discovered, it was occupied by a combination of rats, cats and dogs that had decomposed to skeletons." (again, be specific. Also, expand more on the cadaver storage system. It sounds interesting.)
"…in triskaidecagon patterns. " (nice use of different shapes, but you may want to just label how many sides that is.)
"Post-acquisition of SCP status , and quarantine, these incidents have ceased, and, over time, the tenants have recovered. (note)" (this needs so much work that its not even funny. Expand this line into a paragraph.)
Also, remember to put spaces between Object Class: and Keter. Same goes for the containment procedures.
And, when it comes to naming the rooms, give more indication to why the staff call them those names.
Labeling things Keter does not automatically make them scary or dangerous. It makes them misclassified.
Its not really clear what this SCP does, or why it drives people nutso. Also, tell about who made it. Does M,C&D have a hand in this? The Factory? Sentient chipmunks?
This has potential, though. Good Luck!
(just reverse "affordable" and "spacious" and you should be good.)
(explain more about this. Are they inlaid? Super-glued on? even "attached" would work. Nice job on the numbering, though.)
(nice use of different shapes, but you may want to just label how many sides that is.)
Also, tell about who made it. Does M,C&D have a hand in this? The Factory? Sentient chipmunks?
No, no, no, and no. These are all horrible pieces of advice, and does not address the fundamental flaws with this article. Illithid, you are not qualified to be giving out SCP writing advice and I suggest you stop stepping on the toes of vets in this forum.
One more thing- take a page from Dr. Bright's book:
"When in doubt, throw D-class at it!"
This is a poorly conceived and horribly written SCP that is little more than a building that drives you insane. The details are extraneous rather than interesting, and the tone is so off-putting that I literally can't even force myself to do anything more than skim over the major details.
Considering the tone of your initial question and how new you are, it is my humble opinion that you need to sit back and read more of the site before trying your hand at writing.
to submit to a psychological analysis.
You make it sound like it is torture or forced on them.
Some people cannot stand psych evals. It's mostly nothing to do with them being painful, but some people just hate sharing their emotions rather than bottling them up or what have you.
Hey Beeburgers - I'm new to the site as well, so take this with the equivalent grains of salt. Within this allowance, let me point out two things I have noticed, however, that are shared between most successful SCPs.
1. Tone of voice.
Take the first description line as an example: "On the outside SCP-### resembles an ordinary twenty (20) floor residential complex." I would rephrase as "The outside of SCP-#### appears to be a standard twenty (20) floor residential complex." Small changes, but important: remember that the 'people' writing these articles have absolutely no sense of humor. To look at it outside of SCP's meta-story, the less emotional inference and connotation, the better; you want your reader to read that into the article himself, giving him emotional involvement as a result of the emotional vacuum perceived. A good example of this: SCP-231. The lack of any emotion when describing the containment procedures, or the situation SCP-231-07 is in, conveys a cold, sterile, dangerous environment. It is also implied that feeling for the subject will end the whole world - or worse. This brings out (in most readers) exactly what is stripped from the reports.
It's similar to what makes [REDACTED] such an effective tool: the modern mind is too curious and pattern-oriented to avoid reading in what would frighten it, or at least incite interest.
I cannot stress this point enough: imagine your narrator is Ben Stein with PTSD disorder, talking in a flat, emotionless monotone. That shit is scary.
Another related example I would change: "The first incidents at SCP-### seemed mostly benign in nature. After a prolonged period of residency, tenants began to exhibit symptoms of psychosis. Men and women who’d never had any history of mental illness would develop, seemingly overnight, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and become delusional."
-> "SCP-#### came to the Foundation's attention on 01-01-1980, when an undercover agent in [REDACTED] forwarded a series of related police reports regarding ██ missing persons in [REDACTED]. Further investigation revealed that each missing person had changed their forwarding address to [DATA EXPUNGED] within the past two months, and an exploratory team was launched to the location under the guise of telecommunications workers. (etc etc they discovered the people, catagorized them and terminated them after they tried to attack them in 'defense' of their work, or what ever you prefer.)
This leads into my second suggestion: 2. Assume nothing, skip nothing. The SCP articles are written with the intent to A. Fully describe, to the best of the foundation's knowledge, what the SCP is, B. To describe it's effects as clearly as possible, C. To catalogue as best they can where, when and how it came into their custody, and D. How to contain it. If you ever had to write out experimental procedures in High School, think that level of exactness. Also, remember that every SCP object is anomalous and unknown; a strange coke-bottle that changes colors could some day create a perfect vacuum and inhale everything past some poor drinker's trachea through the bottle's neck without warning; you never know.
A related change I'd make would be the last sentence: "Post-acquisition of SCP status , and quarantine, these incidents have ceased, and, over time, the tenants have recovered." How do they know that? Did they do testing with a memetic or telepathic SCP that absolutely ensured they had returned to normal? There's a reason most civilians affected by Eudlic-level SCPs are kept in observation indefinitely or terminated: waaaay too many cases where they let someone go after ascertaining they were 'all right,' only to be bitten in the ass when they erupted six months later into an elderitch horror - or Justin Beiber, take your pick. This is where a test log would help you, in both conveying in detail the horror this building inflicts upon ordinary-Joe tenants and allowing you to expand on your creative idea.
Hope this helps! I'll be checking back in to see how this one goes. I like the concept - even if it's been mirrored in the SCP archives before - but it needs to be 'Foundation-ified,' for lack of a better verb.
I like seeing long responses from newbies; it suggests that you're taking the time to read and think and give concise feedback and I appreciate this kind of behavior. However, some of these points are faulty:
1. Tone of voice.
Rather than either of those, it really ought to simply read, "SCP-XXXX is a twenty-story [insert architectural style]-style apartment building." "outside" or "resembles" implies that it is, in fact, not a building. Which it is.
Did they do testing with a memetic or telepathic SCP that absolutely ensured they had returned to normal?
Gratuitous cross-linking with existing SCPs is frowned upon in SCP articles. Logically, it wouldn't be allowed in-universe for reasons you've already listed; you have no idea how two unexplained, anomalous objects might interact. Who knows what kind of disaster you could start by cross-contaminating them. Rather than these suggestions, the phrase should simply have been, "subjects exposed to SCP-XXXX appear to recover once removed from the premises and have not exhibited long-term damage". This explains that we are pretty sure but not 100% certain that nothing bad happens in the long term.
Again, thanks for trying to help, but I think you should probably defer to more experienced author advice in this case as well.
It's not just for my sake; getting advice on your advice is also helpful. I would appreciate the chance to be proven wrong though. On what you said: is there a generally-accepted 'reasonable' procedure in-universe for making sure people don't have lingering mental effects?
Months and months of close observation with regular psychiatric evaluation. The mind is a delicate thing at the best of times, and there's no easy way of making sure it's not broken. This is why we try not to expose valuable personnel to mind-affecting agents.
So much advice! Huge thanks to everyone for writing in… I don't even know where to start.
Well actually there is one thing: The building is not a "make people crazy" emitter/structure/entity. From what I have so far, there's no way to know otherwise. The experiment would have helped to clarify it a bit better. Also there are some notes that need to be added on my part. While these are done, I didn't have time to familiarize myself with the system to put them up cleanly before running off to work today. That will be taken care of quickly, and I hope I haven't put anyone off my SCP in a permanent sense.
From what I've read, my tone in the writing seems a little cheeky (tongue in cheek) and doesn't lend itself to a proper technical document. That, I can fix.
My biggest worry, at this point, is putting in too much information. Not becuase I'm worried about revealing too much about what the building was created for (that's one of those "just a bit too far outside normal to be properly understood" type of things) however, I am worried about putting so much in there that it becomes boring or overwhelming. I know I can put [Redacted] in certain parts to thin out the paragraphs, but doing so seems a little touch and go at the moment.
Thanks again for all the feedback. I'll be implementing as much as I can (contradictions might be resolved with me flipping a coin, I will be honest) Thank you!