SCP-914 Experiment Log Guidelines

General guidelines, the ones we all know.Output: [DATA EXPUNGED] resulted in ██ deaths, including Dr. ████ and 19 research personnel. Note: *Oh, the horror!* Dr. ██████

1. SCP-914 does not create or destroy matter, nor does it change anything on the atomic level.

Example (wrong):
**Input:** One silver table spoon.

**Setting:** Fine

**Output:** A set of ornate gold-plated cutlery.

SCP-914 is, of course, an anomalous object. What it isn't however, is magic. It builds with what it has, and it isn't capable of transfiguration. Despite it being an anomalous object, conservation of mass1 still applies.

Example (right):

Input: One Security Clearance Card (level 4)
Setting: Very Fine
Output: One 'Master' Credit Card, devoid of any number.

Note: This is an example from the Containment Breach game. Let me be clear on this: The game isn't canon in any way, but I'm using this because it's such a good example of what SCP-914 does. It can be argued that it's an improvement because it's a 'master' card, right? It's also unusable because its obviously forged and doesn't have any numbering.

2. SCP-914 is a cheeky little bugger. It's unpredictable and apparently kind of snarky.

For this log, predictable is boring. If 914 just nicely improved all the input materials, that's out-of-character. I already talked a little bit about it earlier, so let's look at an example here too.

Example (wrong):

Input: One Hard-drive with 500 gigabyte of space.

Setting: Fine

Output: One Solid State drive with 2 terabyte of space.

As seen here, SCP-914 just obediently improved whatever was tested. Not only is this out-of-character, it's also not very interesting. SCP-914 would be fairly boring if it just made whatever you put into it better every time, right?

SCP-914 seemingly has a mind of its own, and its understanding of improvement is probably different from yours:

Example (right):

Input: One digital thermometer.

Setting: Very fine.

Output: An intricate instrument with several digital dials that change when exposed to different temperatures and directions. The symbols do not correspond to any known mathematical object to count or measure.

In other words, it definitely is an improvement, and it's also useless. We can't read what it measures. This is a subversion while still technically counting as an improvement. This is an example, and therefore doesn't mean that all results have to be useless. In the end, it's about subverting expectations.

Generally, you can get away with improving an item without anything else if the last 'setting' surprises a reader or if the improvement is interesting on its own.

3. Biological testing.

Ooh boy. So something that might might need clearing up is that testing with dead things is not technically forbidden. Something made from wood is fine, but a mouse (even a dead one) would have to be cleared. Why? Something biological that isn't defined as a complete organism (leather, wood, coal) is less likely to become a Site-destroying undead cousin to SCP-3000.

Biological testing has to be cleared by O5 command, and that's because it has a very good reason to be forbidden. An in-universe researcher will not be responsible for setting the next 682 loose on humanity because his idiot intern wanted to see what happens if he puts his hamster in on 'very fine'. In other words, testing with organisms poses a risk that usually won't be worth the payoff.

Apart from the risk of testing itself, there are several reasons and caveats why something will or won't get cleared and almost all of them are subjective. As an aside, what researcher is going to bother an Overseer to ask if he can use a potted plant in a test? It's like calling the CEO of Microsoft because you want permission to use the copy machine. Every time you want to use it. In other words, the test needs a good reason.

The bottom line is that biological (organism) testing isn't against the rules if you let it be cleared by O5 command, but will require:

Being held to higher standards of quality.

A reasonably low risk of creating something hazardous.

Specific guidelines.

Be creative, but don't make Foundation personnel look like idiots.

Oh my god, that was [EXPLETIVE] amazing! Can't wait to try very fine!

Professional research personnel are required to act accordingly. If you want, you can make a note to say something along the lines of the researchers facing disciplinary actions (don't kill people please, we're strict, not North Korea). That said, keep in mind that it won't be enough to compensate for someone cramming in a nuclear missile with a piece of 682 to see what happens. That's something that anyone working at the Foundation would find idiotic to try anyway.

If I do make a note myself I'll probably stick with Dr. Veritas, because I'm extremely creative.

If you add entries with spelling errors, grammatical errors or you don't follow the format properly, I'll get cranky with you.

Correcting bolding and punctuation isn't my idea of a happy time. Do this enough times without improving, and I'll start removing your entries all together. I'm a moderator, not an editor.

Using other SCPs for testing is probably a bad plan.

Since the majority would be biological testing, it wouldn't be allowed anyway. If it's not biological, you need to ask yourself if a researcher would be fired for incompetence because they tried this. Improving something that already breaks the law of normalcy is probably a poor idea. The Foundation doesn't bang rocks together, the experiment log is no exception.

Tests that results in massive casualties.

Output: [DATA EXPUNGED] resulted in ██ deaths, including Dr. ████ and 19 research personnel. Note: *Oh, the horror!*

This is likely something that could have been prevented easily and probably makes the Foundation look like irresponsible idiots to attempt the test in the first place. If you try to improve a flamethrower and the researcher was incinerated because they didn't use thermal protection, that's what I'd call "leaving yourself in the hands of natural selection".

Our armory is full.Dr. ██████

*This will be useful, let's store it in the armory.*

More subjective than other guidelines, but anomalous weaponry is overdone as a test result and unlikely to be used. Here's why:

Forgive me for ranting a little, but Mr. In-universe researcher: Are you out of your mind? You're going to add an anomalous weapon that was created by an unpredictable object in order to contain other SCPs? That is asking for trouble. Get out of my testing area before you blow the Site sky high!

If you try to add something anomalous to the armoury or add to your personal collection, you're probably going to be kicked out of the Foundation because we protect and contain things. We don't use an SCP to create cool new boomsticks. Even if something seems useful and safe, that rifle that 914 made might create a black hole on its 987th shot. Bad idea.

About the author/additional notes on pruning:

Are you some sort of authority on 914?

I am the closest thing to an authority outside of Dr. Gears himself. I'm a moderator on the wiki, but I don't have any power that another moderator or administrator doesn't have. That being said, I do oversee what gets added and what doesn't.

Do I have to ask you or anyone else permission to add something to the sandbox?

Please don't. You're free to add experiments to the sandbox, that's what the collaboration tag means. I'm not a gatekeeper, but we do quality control and will ask you to improve something when the test is out of character or has other errors.

Do you make exceptions?

Sure, but your entry better be damn good to compensate for it. It shares this trait with cliché SCP concepts. If you write it well enough, it would be a shame to remove it.

Do I use the number (#) system or not?

While the number (#) notation saw a lot of use in the past, it's not something that really needs to be used unless there's a strong need for the number to be read accurately (drug dosages, for instance.) Otherwise it's just taking up space. Short answer: No.

Can I edit out entries on the sandbox that I think are bad myself?

Nope, that's the job of staff. Feel free to correct spelling and formatting, but the removal of entries is our call.

What if I don't agree with my entry being removed?

You can message me to ask for clarification if the note in the sandbox isn't enough. If you still disagree after that, contact another member of staff for a second opinion. If multiple staff members agree with the pruning, it's probably valid.

Gotcha, so how do I get started?

You already did! Reading this is a great way to start, since you already have an idea of what to do and what not to do. Feel free to add a proposed test log in the SCP-914 Experiment Log Sandbox. If it's good enough, it will be ported over. Make sure to check back the next day or so to see if it made the cut or not. If nothing changed, wait until it does. I make an effort to add new logs and give feedback on the denied entries within a few days.

Conclusion.

I think (and I may be wrong) this [SCP-914] was one of the first "SCP that does/makes stuff" entries, and has fired more imaginations then a panty flash. It's so open, put in thing, get thing. The only rule it seems to follow, at all, is conservation of mass, but the sky is the limit outside that. Like all complex machines, it's easy to attribute a personality or will to it…but that way lies disaster. It is inherently a confounding and frustrating machine, and therein lies the danger, of reading too much in to things and getting obsessed. It draws a lot from golden age Victorian amusements and such, these overly-complex devices preforming rather mundane activities. It's steampunk as hell, and seems to mock standard scientific method, and is overall hard not to love. ~ Dr. Gears

These are guidelines. Some can be broken, but will require a higher quality/more interesting experiment to compensate for it. The only real rule is the first one. If you have any suggestions, additions or objections to any of these, please let me know.

Also note: This is created entirely by me and general guidelines are my take on them. This is why this isn't a guide, but an essay. It's meant as a tool in order to give aspiring authors an understanding of SCP-914 and to help them create more interesting work. Good luck!