Consequently, SCP-2696-1 exhibits much higher levels of aspect rradiation
Minor typo. No complaints otherwise
SCP-2696 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-2696
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-2696.
it's a haunted victorian mansion located in dark peak, how can this be anything but cheesy
- First photo, edited by tawny from synIRC. Licensed under CC 2.0. Photo by user China Crisis on Wikipedia.
- Second photo from public domain.
- Third photo is also public domain.
- Fourth image's skull, licensed under CC 3.0. Photo by user Nevit Dilmen on Wikipedia.
- Fourth image's sigil, photoshopped in by myself, licensed under CC 3.0. Originally by user Schwerdf on Wikipedia, who traced it from a public domain image.
- Last photo is cropped and edited by me. Licensed under CC 2.0. Original photographer is user SBA73 on Flickr.
Thanks to all who read the draft in chat - in no particular order: ARD, Conwell, Jekeled, Metaphysician, Kalinin, TwistedGears, TyGently, Greenwolf, and ztshp - your feedback all helped tremendously. Here's hoping this will be a good one.
(account deleted)Friggen awesome. Detailed paratech, great imagery, heaps of style, concise narrative that ties everything together… one hell of an SCP. This is one of those that shapes canons.
Like I said when I was reviewing this as a draft, this article is a lot of fun. The Gothic themes remind me a lot of Edgar Allan Poe, and the paratech is very interesting to read about. All in all a solid article.
+1 minmin, glad this is finally up.
Well, a few things here.
First, I'm just going to say that the canon-exclusive form of this one kinda throws me.
But two points on the general writing: One, you use the term EVE once or twice before you explain what it means. Two, you've still got an SCP-XXXX in there.
But I think what makes me really not care much for this article is the fact that it's just giant frickin' wall of text after giant frickin' wall of text. I tried… I really did… but I just couldn't make it past the first sentence of the addendum.
I'd say that I really loved the history of the building, as it gave me basically everything I need to know about the story behind the SCP, while maybe deviating a bit from general Foundation tone, but whatever. It was good, and I liked it. Everything before that point seemed extremely (…for some reason the only word coming into my head right now is "extraneous"), and seemed like a lot of reading without much payout. Furthermore, the Keter properties of this SCP are just sorta unceremoniously piled onto the thing without much real need for it. The article would be a lot shorter and a much better read in my opinion if the danger of the thing were bumped down to Euclid levels.
To sum it up, I'd say that the real gold here is the story of a man just trying to hang on to his loved ones. That needs to be the focus of the article, and it should be your hook if you can somehow get it up there. I know it hurts to chop up something you worked really hard on, but I'd say that you're going to have to if you want this to really do well.
I'm gonna have to call a no-vote on this one. I hope to see it again-hopefully a bit more streamlined-in the future.
What is the difference between MTF Theta-77 and Mu-13?
Theta-77 is disinformation? I did not get that at all from reading this. What am I missing?
What you're missing is that I was being dickish in a manner that was entirely uncalled-for. The implication, detached though it may be, was meant entirely as an insult to the author and I should've just kept my mouth shut.
Well there's no particular reason to use any given element from another work, there is no canon. I was just curious if the author had a specific reason to create a new MTF with apparently the same mission profile (and even a same-sourced nickname — though I think "Who you gonna call?" is the better one).
/forum/t-1677277/scp-2696#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
