SCP-2274 / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-2274.

Decibelles 07 Jun 2015 21:26

The object itself is more interesting than it should be (especially what the people staring at it say), and with the excellent interview and the notes at the end, I enjoy it a lot more than I thought I would.

No supernatural strength or unusual speed has been observed in subjects during these outbursts.

I really like this line. I'm so glad you didn't go the "THIS MAKES YOU SUPER STRONG AND FAST RAAA" method, and that the people only act the way they do because they must "stand as he does". *shudders*

Mobile Task Force [REDACTED]

This, then, is my only complaint. You can totally use a real Mobile Task Force here, it's alright. The redaction seems silly because there's no real reason to redact. Even SCP-2310, which details how an MTF went horribly wrong in recovering a skip, actually says what the MTF is.

Otherwise, +1.

OverThinking 07 Jun 2015 21:32

Thank you so much!
The reason I redacted it was because I was unsure if there was any consistent system with the way the Mobile Task Forces were named – I couldn't tell if there was a correlation between Greek letter and specialty. Reading over it again, it doesn't seem like there is one (at least not one I can find) so I'll go ahead and update that. Thank you again!

sirpudding 07 Jun 2015 21:35

There are hints that there may be some magical significance (numerology, law of similarity, law of contagion) going on, but mostly they appear to be codenames (and good infosec says avoid patterns).

Last edited on 07 Jun 2015 21:37 by sirpudding Show more

OverThinking 07 Jun 2015 21:39

That makes sense. Thank you for clarifying!

Accelerando 08 Jun 2015 05:46

The main article and the interview didn't grab me, so I was looking forward to the addendum for some explanation. I was surprised and slightly dissapointed when reading it, because I've written an article about a disgruntled/disturbed artist as well (and an article with a callout at the Foundation).

Sorry, but I have to downvote; I've ruined the addendum for myself. :(

E: on second thought, I'll think I'll no vote this. Will need to revisit.

Last edited on 08 Jun 2015 07:14 by Accelerando Show more

Android487 08 Jun 2015 16:53

Two quick points on an otherwise pretty excellent post…

If left alone, subjects will die of dehydration within 74 hours.

This seems a little… arbitrary?

I think this can be shortened to:

If left alone, subjects will die of dehydration.

If the subject is forced to assume a seated or prone position, or if SCP-2274 is removed from a subject’s line of sight, the subject will react violently, attacking whomever is instigating the change (See Interview Log 2274-1). No supernatural strength or unusual speed has been observed in subjects during these outbursts.

How long does this last?

It would be relatively easy to expose a Class D and then physically remove them from the presence of the statue… is there some reason no testing is allowed?

Last edited on 08 Jun 2015 16:54 by Android487 Show more

OverThinking 08 Jun 2015 19:15

Thank you for pointing those things out!

The reason for including 74 hours was that (to my knowledge) that is the maximum amount of time a human being can survive without water. It was included to show that the effect doesn't extend the lives of victims in any way – it doesn't need the affected people to remain alive. Reading back over it, though, it does look a little awkward. It's been updated.

The outbursts continue until the "threat" is neutralized, either by exposure to the statue, or by being knocked unconscious or killed. That's been updated.

The reason no testing is allowed requires a little explanation.

The reasoning is...

There is no way known by the Foundation to end the effect of the statue. Removing the victims from its line of sight will just make them attack their captors until they exhaust themselves (as in, literally are incapable of movement), then begin again – or return to the statue – when they regain enough energy; this cycle would continue until they died of natural causes or were terminated.

Presumably, the Foundation tried everything they could think of, but the testing was proving fruitless and was eating up D-class, so they just decided no testing was allowed, since if no one saw it everything was okay.

There is a way to end the effect in all surviving victims, which the Foundation is unaware of: destroying the statue. This would most likely have been brought up, but dismissed since if the statue was destroyed (or rather, sent to another dimension or vaporized, as pieces of it still retain its anomalous qualities when separated), no further research could be done on it.

This left the Foundation with a conundrum: there could be no more testing until a cure was found, and (though it was the only possibility left any personnel could think of) destroying the statue might not cure anyone either, and leave them unable to test it anyway.

What option did this leave?

Don't test it, just contain it and call the whole thing square.

So, yeah. Does that make sense? (Also, does it work?)

Thank you for your recommendations!

Android487 08 Jun 2015 20:10

It makes sense, but I'm not sure it's evident to the reader.
(Granted, I can be a bit dense at times…)

+ But, what about something like this?

I think a note from a head researcher stating that amnestics were ineffective would clear this point up and could even be a little funny… budget constraints maybe? I was thinking something like the following:

Dr. Whoever: For the last time, amnestics are not effective in countering the effect of SCP-2274, and if anyone wants to keep throwing D-Class personnel at this thing, they can find the money in the budget to do it!

Just a thought.

OverThinking 09 Jun 2015 19:48

I love this idea! I want to use it, but I'm having trouble thinking of a way that won't hurt the tone.

Previous comments have indicated that the article strikes something of a balance with the spooky factor that is made either by the "stand as he stands" or the interview log, and I'm afraid adding humor at the end might screw with that, if that makes sense. I definitely want to find a way to use that idea at some point, though, because that is a really (darkly) funny concept.

Deacon_Blues_117 06 Jul 2015 07:21

I just ran across this, so this suggestion comes a bit late, but to maintain tone, perhaps a note somewhere that says something along the lines of:

Note: In all cases thus far, amnestics have been completely ineffective in ceasing or ameliorating the effects of SCP-2274. Subjects continue to maintain an erect posture, and to attack anyone who attempts to remove them from the area of effect. Further experimentation has been deemed unnecessary by the Ethics Committee.

TL333s 08 Jun 2015 22:45

No supernatural strength or unusual speed has been observed in subjects during these outbursts.

I would drop this line. Not mentioning superhuman strength would rule it out, I think, and you could even have the doctor in the interview ask about it.

That said, this is a pretty low-key item, but the "I stand as he stands" bit really makes it pop. I'm not sure I like the final note, but overall, this is worth an upvote. Or two, for the interview.

Silberescher 10 Jun 2015 22:17

I like most of the article — the interview is nicely written, and the article in general uses a simple premise to solid effect — but the addendum falls flat for me.

"Artist attacking the Foundation while namedropping AWCY" is a pretty common payoff for an article at this point. Accelerando mentions having an SCP like that upthread, I think Voct has a rewrite to that effect, and I've posted an SCP with that premise.

It feels like a tacked-on effort to give the item a more significant meaning, but it's extrinsic to everything else about it and doesn't really fit.

OverThinking 10 Jun 2015 22:36

Thank you! I'm glad you like it!

On the addendum, AWCY was part of the initial concept of the item and in its initial form, the article was kind of peppered with references to it. The first piece of critique I received was that the general form for AWCY articles was that they saved the name drop for the climax, as the reveal, which is why only one reference remains. I've received several comments about the last note being a weak point, so my question is: would reinstating earlier references (like in the first note or somewhere late in the main body or the interview) make a better buildup to it?

NineAndNinetyHours 21 Jun 2015 08:57

The only thing I like more than AWCY is AWCY done well. +1

OverThinking 23 Jun 2015 13:45

Thank you so much!

pootis spencer here 10 Dec 2015 16:03

I noticed that the victims only respond to the specific questions. Personally, I want to see if they'd respond to, "Are we cool yet?" I'm not saying that you should add it to the document, I'm just wondering what you think of this idea, since this is heavily implied to be related to AWCY. Maybe the guy that made it put in something as sort of a label for it? Or maybe they react as if it was a regular question?

YourBuddyBill 15 Sep 2016 17:01

your collective derivative ass

is a pretty good line tbh

Agent MacLeod 17 Jun 2017 17:44

I was totally posed to upvote until the fucking notes.

1. If random punks know about your secret global paranormal containment/research extragovernmental conspiracy, you're doing a bad job of being an extragovernmental conspiracy.
2. It's not good art and if the point of the narrative was how much of a monstrous asshole the "artist" was, well, the SCP format is unideal for such a narrative.
3. Ignoring the plot hole re:how the Foundation knows what it looks like if the effect extends to photographs, the article was super fucking creepy until you invoked the note-at-the-end trope.

TheSteakKing 08 Aug 2018 07:54

If random punks know about your secret global paranormal containment/research extragovernmental conspiracy, you're doing a bad job of being an extragovernmental conspiracy.

This "totally random punk" just made an SCP object - I don't think one can describe him as a 'random punk'. He clearly knows more than the average person, and if he's capable of creating at least one SCP, it stands to reason that he's anomalous himself which may mean he has involved himself with the Foundation before, whether they realize it or not.

Ignoring the plot hole re:how the Foundation knows what it looks like if the effect extends to photographs, the article was super fucking creepy until you invoked the note-at-the-end trope.

Cover it in form-fitting material -> Learn the shape of the object.

Without looking at it (Either do no look at it or while everything within sight is covered), hit it for the recoil sound and feeling, smell it -> Learn the general material of the object.

It's very careful in that the colour of the object is unknown - that's the only thing they can't surely determine.

(account deleted) 22 Oct 2021 12:51

"AWCY makes yet another piece of art that kills you and delivers a single blunt metaphor about how everyone is sheeple, driven home with a note addressed directly to the Foundation or viewer" is a trope that I hoped had died in 2013.

This is a competent execution of a fundamentally bad trope, but it's not able to transcend the badness at its core. -1

Rancorious 16 Sep 2022 22:19

AWCY are a bunch of losers masquerading as morally justified antagonists.