This scip gave me the feels. Not sure how this one will be received overall considering there is very little darkness in it (which I appreciate as it is relatively rare). +1 from me.
SCP-2567 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-2567
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-2567.
I thought it was a nice, calm SCP. I would, however, drop the closing statement; you were pretty straightforward in conveying the connection between Mayall's and the SCP's behaviors, so that final paragraph struck me as completely redundant.
I don't think we should know his weight. How can we make him get on a scale?
Put one out in some innocuous way that won't upset it (say, if there's a gazebo, put out a tasteful new entry mat), and set a couple empty soda cans in a place where it has to step on the sensor to get to them. I could see them going to the trouble, since it does help establish the thing as corporeal to some extent. (It's not just a highly visible poltergeist; it has actual weight/mass.)
(account deleted)@Scorpion451 there will be a supplemental article in time that explains its behaviors and thoughts, in tale-form.
No worries, you'll know just what does and does not upset it, and how some things have been discovered.
Just one little Spooky Bee
The containment procedures seem really iffy to me. A bunch of agents constantly "herding" an eight-foot-tall monstrosity away from civilians in a relatively small public area sounds awkward and almost comic. Then you go and authorise agents to shoot up the cemetery to keep it in its territory (conspicuous doesn't even begin to describe it), which you then state it cannot leave without falling to pieces. Is it really not possible to just lock it up in its mausoleum or something?
It's a shame, because most of the article is solid, with the exception of the heavy-handed exposition that dspitzle mentioned. That picture isn't even necessary to get the message across that the creature is Maywall - actually, it's just confusing. No vote.
While the rest of these gripes are valid, it's not falling apart because it's leaving its cemetery. It's falling apart because when it's locked in a room, it's incapable of returning to its purpose. If it exits, it can freely return, but if it's restrained and kept away, it destroys itself.
Just one little Spooky Bee
OK, that makes sense then, but I didn't really get it from the article. Maybe add something to the effect that attempting to contain it within the cemetery also led to it disintegrating and re-materializing outside of containment?
I also really can't see the Foundation allowing civilians access to the cemetery with this thing roaming around inside. Sure, walling it off and making up a cover story is conspicuous, but so are armed guards surrounding a cemetary, especially when they start shooting. Between the risk of civilians being hurt by this thing and the risk of them just seeing it and spreading stories, it seems like they would try to keep people out.
I also agree that the conclusion is really unnecessary. It just felt like it was hitting me in the head with information that had already been presented in a better way. Honestly I'd say the whole interview could use tightening up, especially the agent's lines. For instance, the part where he mentions his grandfather's death doesn't really seem to have anything to do with anything that comes before or after it. The foreword also isn't necessary; we can figure out that the agent had already done other interviews from the conversation, and the fact that it was the last interview is irrelevant.
Overall, I really like the concept of this article, but the execution is keeping me from upvoting. Fix these issues and you'll get my +1.
I have 2 problems with this article.
- The skip feels artificial, in the sense that its anomalies seem to be constructed to impress us.
- The article over explains the skip. I mean, you gave some nice hints of what this was and why it did what it did, but you started to answer your own questions. I could probably had figured out in some way or another why the "lavender-scented substance" did what it did, or why the statue existed in the first place1.
Overall, too much explanation caused damage analogous to telling and explaining a joke at the same time. I also felt like the article treated me like a child. I'm not suggesting you to go Dark soul-ish, but it's always good to begin your articles with a nice "less is more" mindset.
Footnotes
1. Hell, even that was unnecessary.
I used to clean up a cemetery in my hometown because it broke my heart to see all the memorial displays with flowers all over the ground, but this article doesn't grab me for a couple reasons.
If the Foundation already owns a site within 1.3km, why don't they just establish a satellite facility around the cemetery? It wouldn't be very sentimental of them to cut a community off from their dead, but it's not beyond their capabilities. At the very least they could secure the boundaries to avoid further aggravation of 2567 if you want the motivations to be a little less detached.
Why does this otherwise groundskeeper-themed anomaly have "several" bulbous eyes floating around his head? The rest of his alterations seem thematically fitting, but this one doesn't. Additionally, this portion of the anomaly suffers from imprecise wording; "SCP-2567's face has several large bulbous eyes on its head" is redundant, and if "these eyes are not fixed in place and can be shifted across its surface", are they required to stay on its face, on its head, or can they move throughout the surface of its entire body?
Finally, a minor dialogue piece: during the interview transcript, when Harold Tanner asks why Agent Ville is inquiring about Mr. Maywall and he gives his response, Tanner replies "Good a reason as ever". This implies that either somebody has asked about Maywall for the same reason in the past or that Agent Ville has asked the same question before. "Good a reason as any" probably captures the spirit of his response a little better.
Overall, I wish there was more to really grab me, but I can see why people would like this and there is something interesting about what is effectively a giant ghoul that only wants to tend and cry over graves. No vote for now.
SCP-2567's face has several large bulbous eyes on its head
That sounds… odd to me. Kinda redundant to mention the face, then say 'on its head'?
Unless it makes sense in english in a way I'm not aware of, since I'm not a native speaker?
/forum/t-1976865/scp-2567#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
