Request for feedback?
SCP-452 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-452
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-452.
Feedback!
I think this deserves an upvote as it is, but I think it would be even better with some of the expunged data actually filled in. I feel like I'm supposed to be intrigued by it, but I'm not, really. +1 either way.
SCP-452 was recovered from [DATA EXPUNGED]. SCP-452's anomalous abilities came to the Foundation's knowledge after [DATA EXPUNGED] was bitten by a specimen and immediately [DATA EXPUNGED].
This has no content. I suggest removing it.
if your reading this your gay
I think this is still a safe class, it can be contained without much difficulty.
I think so too. It's easy to contain and it's negative effects are limited to the deliberately bitten subject. Unless, of course, they were still in the wild and biting people.
A dream-eating spider with a dreamcatcher web, hmm? And then some good old hallucinogenic venom, just to stop it being too useful. I agree that it could do with a few of the expungements being cut though.
Upvoted just for my initial thought, at any rate.
(account deleted)I definitely like the idea of a dream-switching spider, but as already said, the expungement needs help. I do have some questions, though.
Do the sources regain dreams after a set amount of time, or do they never dream again? Are the hallucinations for long periods of time (equal to length of dream?) or just random short bursts? Do the sources remember the recurring dreams taken by the spiders? Is there an antidote for the dream loss?
I think this has a lot of potential to be fleshed out a bit more.
I realize this is an older post and written to the standards at the time, but there is an awful lot of DATA EXPUNGING going on. The description of recovery might as well not exist for all the information given, and Incident 454-2 is just a generic "And then the D-Class EXPUNGED everyone to death because of EXPUNGED" event. Filling in a few of these missing details could do a lot for the piece, I believe.
Eh.
It could be good, but a few typos early on (level 4 instead of Level 4, for example), the awkward phrasing of Source/Subject designations in the log, and the straight-up expungement of what could have been an interesting hook killed it for me.
-1. You've come a long way in a year, clearly, and a re-write to bring this up to par would do it some good.
I have no idea what the fuck is going on in the experiment logs. I can't even tell what the thing actually does or why there is a "source" and "subject" for each experiment
The image in this article is a CC image by Chepyle via Wikimedia Commons.
/forum/t-172151/scp-452#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06