devious photobomber
uploaded: http://rpcauthority.wikidot.com/rpc-443
devious photobomber
Forum
» Writing & Drafts / Archived Drafts
» devious photobomber
Summary:
working titles: 'Cameo' and 'Wanderer'
Formatting
I only noticed two possible errors.
It has always been observed to wear a dark-gray jacket with a white undershirt, black jeans and sneakers.
Grammar: I'd add a comma after black jeans.
It is approximately 1.76 meters in height (5’78” feet).
Typo: remove the 7.
Concept
I can't think of any specific examples off of the top of my head, but I'm fairly certain this general idea has been done before. However, with that caveat out of the way, it does seem like you've done a good job of differentiating it from potentially similar concepts. So, good job!
I really can't fault the writing style apart from the two possible errors noted above. The only criticism I would add would be that it could be longer and/or use more pictures if possible.
Possessed, owned, controlled, by the common-sense infected rational gaze.
thx, I'll probably add a gallery of pics later on if I have the time to make some
Owldude delivering the classic-style goods as usual. I've got a bone to pick with one specific line.
RPC-XXX appears to be vaguely inquisitive in nature
This unassuming statement is problematic and should be cut to improve the article. A big part of what makes this subgenre enticing is drawing your own conclusions; the Authority is a massive institution that misses the forest for the trees. You say "boiling hot", the Authority says "100°C". It makes the writing seem dry and boring if you aren't paying attention, but the magic is on the flipside: the more you do, the more you're rewarded.
Following this small excerpt in the draft are behavioral examples that would serve perfectly well as the breadcrumb trail to the reader's own conclusion: "RPC-XXX appears to be vaguely inquisitive in nature." And for the reader's paying attention (both to these examples and those of the instance log later on), the final reveal of the article is much more rewarding; the pressure is released at the end, not the start.
That being said, I'm not huge on the ending. It's fine, I guess, but it's straightforward and predictable, and I'd say it would be even without the aforementioned flaw. Maybe it's because I've seen almost this exact premise before. I feel this article needs a new layer of intent to really shine, something more than vague musing about "the beauty of the world, or whatever." It could use at least a few extra logs, both to further this point and in general. Five isn't that many, and I think these have the potential to be the main meat of the article. I love the ones already there.
Hazard Types: Incorporeal
I think Sapient or at least Sentient would be a safe inclusion.
prioritizing instances that are especially anomalous in nature.
This is a pretty vague instruction; they're all "anomalous in nature", after all.
(5’8” feet)
5 foot 8 inches… feet.
Although each collected media
Remove "each". (The most faithful correction of this phrase would be "Although each collected medium", but that doesn't make sense.)
RPC-XXX is frequently sighted in locations which are normally inaccessible to civilian personnel, or otherwise inhospitable for prolonged human activity
The comma should be removed. Change "otherwise" to "even", as the former would suggest the "inaccessible" object to be a subset of the "inhospitable" one. I'm unsure about "inhospitable for prolonged human activity"; maybe "unfit for human life"?
it has never been observed directly interacting with personnel in the vicinity
Confusing language; "personnel", without qualifiers, carries a strong connotation of referring to Authority staff and should be avoided, and "vicinity" is a poor explanation of the context. "It has never been observed directly interacting" is pretty roundabout. I suggest: "it never interacts directly with recorded individuals".
Interrogated personnel who were present during RPC-XXX sightings are unable to recall ever physically noticing the entity.
As opposed to what, psychically noticing it? "Ever" suggests a nonexistent distinction between noticing it once or multiple times. Also, "personnel" again.
spare-room
Nobody hyphenates this.
Put the examples in chronological order. Doing so would only switch the locations of two logs, which seem more like beat panels than developments, so it wouldn't be disruptive. The order is distracting otherwise, and you'd think the Authority would have an interest in sorting them.
and making a turn and out of the camera's range.
Remove the second "and".
the civilian personnel present could not recall noticing RPC-XXX's presence.
Repetitive wording ("present", "presence").
NASA'S
Accidental extra capitalization.
Photograph of the grand opening of the EPCOT theme park at the Walt Disney World Resort in Bay Lake, Florida.
You could put a pothole crosslink to 870 on this line. It would be cute…
over ██.███ views
Maybe this is just my problem, but using a dot as the decimal separator (as opposed to the delimiter) is standard in most English-speaking countries.
At the time of shooting, civilian personnel were not permitted to enter in close proximity of the crater.
At this point I'm convinced you've used the word "personnel" too much.
spotted via
"spotted by"
aimlessly a corridors
Typo.
Security personnel were immediately alerted once RPC-XXX was sighted
"Once RPC-XXX was sighted" is redundant.
as staff entered the room the entity suddenly began to run toward the exit
"Suddenly began to run" is unnecessary verbiage. At least cut out "suddenly", if not shortening it entirely to "ran".
This scene is strange, because up to this point it's unclear whether RPC-XXX exists physically at all or if it only manifests in the recordings. This is alluded to at the end of the paragraph, but it should've been acknowledged from the beginning.
In the ensuing scuffle, RPC-XXX successfully managed to evade 5 guards whilst making a beeline toward the doorway
Is it much of a scuffle if all it did was evade people? Also, say "successfully evaded", not "successfully managed to evade". I'd smoothen the sentence further by switching "whilst making" to "in". If not, I'd change "whilst" to "while", because the latter is easier on the tongue and you've used American spellings elsewhere.
and promptly de-manifested as it left the room and turned the corner.
You could probably simplify this into something like, "[…] doorway, after which it vanished."
This denotes the first time that RPC-XXX was sighted physically.
This sentence is self-explanatory.
a seemingly anonymous number
I'd like to know what makes a phone number "seem" particularly "anonymous". What was the area code?
Incorporeal, Sapient
No proof it's sapient.
Current containment efforts are focused primarily on the recovery of recorded RPC-443 sightings, prioritizing with priority given to instances that are especially concerning in nature.
Authority webcrawler Γ-4982 (“CAMEO”)
You know exactly what you have to change here dawg.
RPC-443 is an entity resembling a human male, 20-25 years of age. It is of apparent East-Asian ethnicity, with short black hair and a lean build.
RPC-443 is a humanoid resembling an East-Asian male between 20 and 25 years old, with short black hair and a lean build.
It has always been is observed to always be wear a dark-gray jacket with a white undershirt, black jeans, and sneakers.
Move the "It is approximately 1.76 meters in height (5 feet 8 inches)" sentence before this, always finish objective physical descriptors before subjective ones. Also, 5'8", not 5 feet 8 inches
RPC-443 has yet to be sighted physically, and appears exclusively in photographs and video recordings. Although collected media varies in context, RPC-443 is frequently sighted in locations which that are normally inaccessible to civilian personnel or even inhospitable for human life (see Addendum).
Break paragraph after this, footnote instead of parenthesis.
RPC-443 never interacts directly with recorded individuals humans using recording equipment, and most of itssightings depict it observing from afar, briefly inspecting surrounding objects, or simply “passing by”. Individuals who were present during RPC-443 sightings, when interrogated, are unable to recall physically noticing the entity.
Break paragraph after this.
Attempts to track down RPC-443’s movements via security footage have failed, as it appears to simply disappear when out of view (ex.: turning a corner, entering a spareroom)
Turn it into an actual sentence instead of a parenthesis example.
Evidence collected at the site of RPC-443 sightings indicate that the entity can manipulate its surroundings to an extent, as it has occasionally moved objects around and tampered with machinery.
And what's that evidence? Use "it is hypothesized" or "theorized" if you don't have proper evidence beyond tampered machinery.
Upon interrogation, ███████ divulged stated
RPC-443 is was viewing one of the paintings
Thoughts:
I see what you’re aiming for here, but the execution falls short. It doesn’t create any meaningful sense of mystery, and its attempts at being scary or “funny” miss the mark. It has the makings of a Series I SCP article, sure, but in a style that feels outdated by RPC’s current standards.
You don’t create mystery by withholding everything from the audience; you create it by giving them enough puzzle pieces to let them draw their conclusions. None of the logs make the article all that "interesting".
They are rage, brutal, without mercy. But you. You will be worse.
/forum/t-17172753/devious-photobomber#post-