SCP for lunch

Summary:

well... sort of.

SCP for lunch

NightCoffee365 28 Jan 2012 02:54

I've reformatted my idea into an honest-to-goodness SCP! It's here in the sandbox for the review of whomever happens by. feedback, as always, is appreciated.
*update*- edited the end bit thanks to some input. it should read a bit more solid now.

Last edited on 28 Jan 2012 05:13 by NightCoffee365 Show more

Re: SCP for lunch

Jazzyhattrick 28 Jan 2012 03:14

Brings a whole new meaning to the phrase you are what you eat. There's quite a lot of stuff in there that makes it read like a
-J. Extremist Vegans, general unwillingness to share lunch etc. And food dummies sounds like a children's cartoon extolling the virtues of a balanced diet. That isn't to say that I don't like it, I'd definitely give it an upvote but there will be a few people that have a hard time taking it seriously.

Re: SCP for lunch

NightCoffee365 28 Jan 2012 03:42

the term 'food-dummies' made me chuckle too, but i had to come up with some sort of cover.

small aside: the 'extremist vegans' are taken from real life experience. back in the ancient time of 1996, there were millitant vegan punk rockers in my town. a couple of them were detained by police for accosting people at a burger king.

i do realize the cover story is just shy of ridiculous and probably needs some work. i'm just not sure how the SCP would cover up 'missing patient replaced by man sized bread-shell full of ice cream and slim jims'

Last edited on 28 Jan 2012 03:46 by NightCoffee365 Show more

Re: SCP for lunch

Kimura Okagawa 28 Jan 2012 03:50

Minor nitpick:

All containment procedures must be performed by OS-3 or higher personnel

should actually be "Level 3 or higher personnel". You were thinking of the O5s, who aren't supposed to get near SCPs.

Anyway, it's fairly well written, but like Jazzy said, it seems more like -J material. The idea is good, but it just doesn't sound like a main-lister.

Re: SCP for lunch

NightCoffee365 28 Jan 2012 05:08

thanks for the nit-pick! it now reads correctly.
also, since the breakdown in the general tone seems to happen around the addendum, i executed a general edit. a little too much info. i really need to repress my compulsion to tie up loose ends. hell, LOST made me angry! just saying.