This SCP just seems too unfinished. I honestly don't know what this SCP does at all, and I have absolutely no clue what SCP-717-2 is since the article seems to completely skip it.
This article needs a LOT more fleshing out and expansion.
SCP-717 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-717
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-717.
Technically, this is what a Containment Procedure should be: it says only how to keep it safe, only the info that is necessary for the local security personnel. They don't need to know what is this thing or what it likes to talk about to protect it well.
But practically, it's boring and disinteresting.
Yes, but even so, the article has the feeling that it's horribly incomplete. There's a difference between need-to-know and knowing nothing at all.
I actually cut a lot of detail out of my original draft for very reason judgedeadd brought up. For the poor schmucks on site, it's not supposed to be about who or what 717 represents. It's that they have to sit in a cold dark room with a twitching cloth dummy and act calm while waiting for higher ups.
The two clues I left in were an unusual sentence copied from another SCP and the date of the next meeting. I plan on adding transcripts of "conversations" with this thing that may explain more later.
It needs slightly more brickshitting, but in all honesty, it's a very good start. There's a good base here, and the dish itself is well prepared, it just needs a bit of a finishing touch. A little spice, if you will.
I like it a lot. Effective use of omission, here. I particularly like the hints along the lines of "mutual agreement" and "less enthusiastic". The "ambassador" angle isn't coming through very well, although the idea itself is pretty scary.
The 2012 reference seems a bit juvenile. Designating the emergency procedure "Omega" is likewise trying too hard, although I suppose it's believable that emergency procedures would in general be called "Omega".
I don't really get the ambassador part…Can that be explained a bit more? It seems to just demand stuff without offering anything…
I really need to touch this one up, actually. It could use a full rewrite.
The basic idea is that the entity represents whatever is beyond the locked vault. They have communicated with it and found out that the horrible cold shadow things over there are just as horrified by us as we are of them, thus it is an Ambassador.
It's also not quite rational. It'd like to negotiate us into no longer breathing or talking or giving off body heat.
I kind of liked it more the way it was, where there was an entity talking but one couldn't know why, something sealed up because everyone liked it that way, and a second entity was in the basement and it would be bad if it started communicating too. I don't suppose I can pursuade you to revert and just rename the SCP to "The Mannequin" or somesuch?
If not, this is creepy too, it just doesn't hit me the same way.
I took out the second mannequin because I felt it would be better to shorten the overall piece rather than keep the extra angle but I'm glad you liked the idea. I'll see if I can restore some of that unsaid mystery in a future edit.
(account deleted)I didn't get it at first, but I like this article a lot for the same reason I like a lot of older articles: you get the most horror from reading the containment procedures (or, as here these tend to go into the description, whatever counts as a containment procedure), not necessarily the actual items (although the items are creepy too). On this matter, major props.
I like this, hence an upvote, but the structure feels a bit odd - as if the containment-procedures section spilled into other sections of the document, if you get my drift. I actually caught myself thinking "okay, excellent procedures, now where is the description?" upon reaching the addendum, only to find out by scrolling up that I had in fact just finished reading it. Maybe there is some way of rearranging the text a bit to mitigate this problem.
I really like this, but
See description for procedures relating to SCP-717's individual components.
WHY
if your reading this your gay
Agreed. Good SCP, but this is a "special containment procedure" SCP with a VERY short or mostly redacted "Description" and I would say it currently doesn't comply with the spirit of item description standards. And I'd say the "incident log" is actually a "recovery log", as "incident" implies an event after recovery. The log clearly describes an event prior to containment, not after.
/forum/t-155146/scp-717#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
