Word Count: 1.5k
My Greenlight- [http://www.scpwiki.com/forum/t-13961464/fireproof-rescue-dog]
Draft- [http://scp-sandbox-3.wikidot.com/breakerbreaker]
Goal: My goal is to write simple, but effective story about a sympathetic and understandable SCP.
Concerns:
Narrative: I’m worried the narrative lacks impact. At least to me, it feels like something is missing. I’m also concerned that the narrative feels muddled and unclear.
Clinical Tone: My clinical tone isn’t perfect. I’d appreciate any suggestions on how to improve it.
Dialogue: Although there isn’t much dialogue in this article, I’m still worried it feels unnatural and doesn’t flow.
Image Credits: I’ve looked over the licensing guide to properly credit the image I used in this article. However, I would appreciate if someone could double check my citation.
I’ll give a short overall review on this, and I might return to share more thoughts on it later.
The biggest problem for me right now is the emotional connection with this SCP and it’s the owner. Also, I feel like sending the dog to work with MTF is kinda shrugged off quickly. I don’t know why they decided to have this SCP work with the mobile task force in the first place.
Overall, you should work more on the emotional aspects.
Fox 🦊
Those were definitely my biggest concerns. Thank you for the quick and concise feedback!
Summoned through PM!
Mistakes are numbered while comments are under this mark: #)
1) of injury from SCP-XXXX1.
I've checked your Description section and I don't see any components with the designation of "SCP-XXXX-1". I assume this was just simply a typographical error.
2) (Canis lupus familiaris)
I don't think this was necessary as most dogs, regardless of breed, possessed the same latin name (unless I miss something, in that case, I could be stand corrected)
3) with black and white coloring.
white fur and black spots.
Again, I think this was unnecessary.
#) allows it perform adequately in both warm and cold weather
Okay, now you got me intrigued!
4) third degree burns on four teens
Four? I thought there was only three.
#) SCP-XXXX was owned by eighteen-year old Guillermo Gutierrez, from August 18, 2007-July 5, 2009.
If he was a volunteer, I don't usually see this guy as still a "teen", and I think the document should not identify him too as such. SAR volunteer was the right term, in my opinion.
#) G. Gutierrez and SCP-XXXX were remarkably successful SAR volunteers despite SCP-XXXX's abilities and the short period of time that the team was in operation.
You ever watch one of those old American films about dogs being volleyball players, a second form of Tim Allen, or that one named after a musician? The anomaly kinda had that vibe. If this was a film, it felt like the Foundation spoiled everything XD
#) they were being "irresponsible". So what? Bug off
You, being an SAR volunteer, should know any better. If one of our superiors in the Marines reprimanded a group of college kids (let's say slightly older than I) for wading around Southern Philippine coast, I would have let him! (Hell, I might even join in the berating but I'm not an asshat) Knowing that the place was very dangerous.
I'm not sure how people "smoke" in lowlands (I am unfamiliar of the term and activity), but it kinda sounded dangerous, if it warranted the attention of a cop and an SAR volunteer.
5) SCP-XXXX's anonalmous internal
anomalous
#) Description: SCP-XXXX is placed in a temperature controlled test room. The temperature of the room starts at 70� and is increased by 10� every 5 minutes.
I couldn't imagine this! Nooo! Poor pup :'(
#) SCP-XXXX proceeded to lay on its side and wag its tail at researchers. No negative reaction was observed.
Now I know that the Foundation are the most evil organization in the entire universe. >:(
#) Along with this, SCP-XXXX is able to raise it's internal body temperature to as high as 1100� Celsius (2012� Fahrenheit).
So not only was it fireproof, but it was also cold proof?
6) and it's recent
and its recent
#) regarding the increasing concerns towards SCP-XXXX and it's recent spurts of depressive tendencies.
Yeah, you guys are literally grilling yourself a "hot dog".
#) The plan is to allow SCP-XXXX to join a Mobile Task Force for Foundation-sanctioned Search and Rescue missions.
YES YES YES
7) the anomaly's aggression and whether or not it could be safely controlled.
The only aggression stated throughout the document was its penchant for impulsively risking its life. I think instead of "aggression" it should be "attitude" or "behavior"?
#) I want your assurance that it won't kill someone again.
Wait, it did? It wasn't mentioned.
#) By order of Director ����������, MTF Iota-3 ("Guard Dogs") is to oversee use of SCP-XXXX in small incidents (i.e. fires, earthquakes, flooding) and low-level containment breaches
YEAH!
None so far. But for the sake of filling this section with something, I do like to point out that the conversation between the admin and the researcher was a little bit vague as to who did the SCP anomaly had killed? I mean, the dog isn't probably going to hurt something, much less kill (as seen even in the SAR action logs).
1) Well, it's a DOG! Need I say more?
2) The dog's anomalous properties and the fact that it became an MTF asset. I like documentations, skips, tales about anomalies or Tom Clancy-type equipment being utilized as MTF asset because the world around the Foundation are literally no joke. Although it was not described much but we do know that there were dangerous anartists, ano-terrorists and some GoIs much badass(er) than the Serpent's Hand or the Insurgency who would literally do anything just to wreck the Foundation (or destroy the world it was trying to protect).
The dog, being a part of it, would be a great additional in assisting disaster-related anomalies that could be man-made or not.
Also, I do think Guillermo Gutierrez should also be included in the MTF (I mean I hope, but attempting to do so will definitely require some heavy convincing on the part of the author, to the community). But knowing the Foundation, we could always look at the Amnesiacs (and its possible deployment for "personality reconstruction process" ;) hmmm)
But no, I don't know. It's your draft, I don't want to mess or complicate it if you don't fancy the idea (and I don't want to be the reason for its downvote should it backfired so…) but it was just a suggestion that you could always look back to.
3) First parts kinda sounded like it was out of a feel-good dog flick, except the Foundation ruined everything and turned it into a noir-film. Nice job, Foundation. Nice job.
Like I said earlier, it was like something out of a kid-friendly film. The anomaly was "thermal-proof" (I'm not sure if I am correct with my word usage) but that's how I see the dog. For me, the votes relied solely whether the community will accept the closing letter of the document, which reminded me of that SCP that became an MTF Force (those three Quake players that became their own avatars—you should check that out), except this one was light hearted and they were both not related to each other. I kinda felt that, in that SCP document, it was the driving point for the votes (because I did upvoted because of it).
I'm not sure about this dog SCP, but you can bet that I will upvote this, because it's a beneficial one—something you don't usually see around in a corner.
Secondly, I do feel that the pacing of the description, leading up to the SAR action logs until to the experimentation felt like a little bit "fast" if you ask me. The ride was both quick and smooth, as if nothing just happened. I may be a little bit biased when I said that you had me intrigued (because I am, I mean I love dogs!), but I don't speak for the rest of the community.
I couldn't suggest any possible way for you to change it, aside from tweaking the aforementioned grammatical errors, and the inconsistency that I kinda see back there. For me, I will upvote this as it is (given that the mistakes are fixed, and also if you notify me that it was in the mainsite), but it is wise that you get second opinion for better result. I do hate this being seen in the deletion area.
If you have any questions, please drop me a PM. Best of luck with your draft!
I’m so glad you liked it and I throughly enjoyed your comical observations! I do agree that there’s definitely parts of the narrative that could use some clarifying and expanding. I’ll definitely try to punch up the article a bit before posting it proper.
Test logs 1 & 2 are the best bits. Anomalous dog acting like bored dog in middle of ridiculous temperatures is cool. 3 feels like an overuse of collapsible - the only new information in there is the exact temperatures, which would be more appropriate as part of the description.
At least the first time, and possibly every time, the temperature should be °C, not just the degree symbol. Otherwiise it is unclear whether you mean F or C, and that makes professors and science mag editors unhappy. On reread, looks like you are giving temperatures in degrees F, they should be converted to degrees C because metric.
Math reality check: At 3000 Fahrenheit, don’t worry about the dog; worry about the room. Iron, copper, gold, and glass all melt by then. So even if you lined the room with firebrick to keep the walls and floor from melting, none of the sensors, test equipment, or safety gear would survive. Also at 3000, everything is glowing white hot and can’t really be looked at directly - hard to tell what white hot dog is doing. Finally, a ramp of 10 degrees every 5 minutes means it would take 5 hours to get up to temperature; a bit overlong between dog bathroom breaks. I would recommend dropping the max test to 1000 F (approx 600 C). That is still hot enough to melt solder and make paper spontaneously ignite, so plenty hot to demonstrate anomalousness while still being a testable temp. I would also suggest having the dog’s”normal” temperature be low enough to not incinerate its food and toys, flash-boil its drinkng water, or murder-burn the human it tries to play with or rescue.
I’d also do more testing on the low temp end. Normal sled dogs can survive well below freezing. The record coldest temperature down in Antartica is -90C, -130F, which is cold enough to freeze dry ice. That is cold enough where survival would be anomalous, and you don’t want to go much lower because then you have to worry about the air turning into liquid air, which is hard to breathe even if you tolerate the cold.
On the emotional side, the email chain is comparatively long and tedious to convey the idea of “management thinks using the dog for S&R is a good idea.” Better to focus on the dog in the field: just a sentence or two for “S&R approved” and instead do interview logs with the new dog handler, incident logs of it finding people, cool story about fire rescue, etc. To summarize, don’t tell us the dog will do Foundation search & rescue, show us the kinds of rescues the dog made possible. And do tell us cute goofy painfully hot dog stories.
I was wondering about the logistics and math behind the temperature shenanigans I’m writing about. Thank you so much for the critique. I will definitely be implementing some of your points.
Summoned via PM: Will crit within a couple of days
Summoned Via PM
Hi there BreakerBreaker, let's take a look at your draft.
Overall:
I like the article you've written here. It's a fun concept with some cute and comedic tests sprinkled in the middle. However, I'd have to agree with your statement that the article is missing something. IMO, I think the draft is missing a proper set up for the conclusion. Yes, we learn about Angelo's past as a search and rescue dog, but that doesn't really lead us into anything involving the conclusion. He starts out as a rescue dog, presumably kills and injures a few people, (but that doesn't affect him, since he's a dog) and then gets taken in by the Foundation. I personally like the conclusion, but the article ends up feeling rather flat in terms of plot.
Specific:
I'll be using strikethrough for what to cut and green for what to add.
Anything in SCP-XXXX’s containment unit must be entirely resistant to intense heat
Even though the Foundation may not know the exact limits of how hot Angelo can make things, they'd still include some kind of number as to how hot the 'intense heat' is. As in, "intense heat of up to #### degrees".
If SCP-XXXX is to come into contact with any entity, living or otherwise, said entity must wear adequate protection to minimize risk of injury from SCP-XXXX1.
It's the conprocs, so it would make sense that the 'adequate protection' would be specified by giving the exact model of a suite they can wear to protect themselves.
SCP-XXXX has shown itself to be entirely unaffected by heat.
SCP-XXXX has shown itself to be entirely unaffected by heat. external temperatures.
██████████ ██████ Hospital regarding a fatal incident that had occurred at Red Rock State Park
Not seeing the need for black boxes here. The hospital isn't anomalous and doesn't present a risk to security if it wasn't redacted, so it'd probably be left uncensored. For more on what I'm talking about, take a look at this handy guide for redactions and black boxes.
Prior to this incident, SCP-XXXX was owned by eighteen-year old Guillermo Gutierrez, from August 18, 2007-July 5, 2009.
Prior to this incident, SCP-XXXX was owned by eighteen-year old Guillermo Gutierrez, from August 18, 2007 to July 5, 2009.
Recovered records have shown that G. Gutierrez and SCP-XXXX
Recovered records have shown that G. Gutierrez and SCP-XXXX
Only other issue was Derrick trying to rough up the kids because they were being "irresponsible". So what? Bug off.
I get that Guillermo is eighteen and all, but anyone who spends their free time volunteering for SAR probably wouldn't be so nonchalant about irresponsible teens starting a fire.
Got another grilling, but alright because Derrick got some serious scalds. Blames Angelo but we both know that's bull.
Since Guillermo is Angelo's owner, he would presumably know about his anomalous abilities. With that in mind, this comes across as Guillermo being okay with his dog seriously scalding someone who he doesn't like, which I'm not sure is the intent of this line. If that is indeed what he's supposed to be conveying, it makes Guillermo a pretty unlikeable character.
SCP-XXXX is placed in a temperature controlled test room. The temperature of the room starts at 70° and is increased by 10° every 5 minutes.
It's customary for the Foundation to only use the metric system, and these appear to be in Fahrenheit.
500° SCP-XXXX began to stare blankly at researchers. No negative reaction was observed.
1120° SCP-XXXX proceeded to lay on its side and wag its tail at researchers. No negative reaction was observed.
3000° SCP-XXXX rolled onto its back and attempted to chew on its tail. No negative reaction was observed.
Literally just the dog with the hat sitting in a burning room saying "This if fine" meme and it's great.
30° SCP-XXXX proceeded to urinate on the test room floor. No negative reaction was observed?
Got an audible laugh out of me.
Test Log XXXX.Conclusion
This basically serves as a wrap up to the tests we just read, so I don't think it needs to be in a separate addendum. Having it in the same one as the tests makes more sense.
After speaking with Director ██████████,
This goes back to the black boxing thing, but just the name of the Site Director wouldn't be a security threat. It would likely be common knowledge among staff, and it's not as if knowing their name could lead to security breaches.
Advice:
As I said before, we need to have some sort of arc involving Angelo in order to make the draft a bit more interesting and give us a sense of progress. To accomplish this, I'd suggest repurposing the documentation of Guillermo and Angelo's experiences. Instead of just describing some times they went and did SAR stuff and got into conflict with a cop, which doesn't end up amounting to anything narrative wise, perhaps it describes Guillermo's discovery of Angelo's abilities.
You could start out by having Guillermo realize that Angelo has his abilities one day, perhaps because he was able to run through a fire to save someone and not be harmed. He's confused, but he's glad his dog is okay and he's interested in why he's now like this. Fast forward a bit, and we see that he's having trouble adjusting to Angelo's scalding properties. Maybe his home has caught fire multiple times, or Angelo has repeatedly brought home sticks that have caught on fire. He's almost at his wit's end and begins to dislike Angelo's abilities quite a lot. The final straw comes when Angelo horribly burns Guillermo. Perhaps he was just wanting to play and got too excited. It doesn't matter though, as Guillermo can no longer keep Angelo since he's too much of a danger. He won't give him to a shelter, since the people there as well as the other dogs might end up getting hurt too, but he doesn't have the heart to shoot him. He finally decides on dropping off Angelo somewhere in the wilderness, since he doesn't have any other choice. A tearful goodbye ensues, and Guillermo drives away as Angelo is distracted by some food he left on the ground.
It's at this point the Foundation finds Angelo after he causes the forest fire. The dog appears depressed and lonely. However, after discovering his previous experience in SAR and perhaps because one researcher thinks it might help the Angelo's emotional state, the Foundation executes the plan you have laid out. Thanks to the MTF being equipped to deal with Angelo safely, he can once again play around and get lots of love and attention, as well as save people like he's always wanted. This narrative would set up a great groundwork for the conclusion you've laid out and would make the article feel much more complete and emotionally satisfying.
Feel free to contact me through PM if you have any questions or would like me to do a follow up, as I might not see it otherwise. Good luck with your draft!
Thank you very much for your critique and suggestions. There are definitely some elements here that I will take into consideration in a revised draft.
