Ain't I a stinker?
Yeah so, uh, to differentiate between human wanderers and entity 79, capitalize "Wanderers."
:)
Entity 79 - "Wanderers" / Discussion
Forum
» Meta / Per page discussions
» Entity 79 - "Wanderers"
This is the discussion related to the wiki page Entity 79 - "Wanderers".
Oh no! If I am shouting the word "WANDERER" then others will not know what I am referring to!
unless i have to specifically shout "wANDERER" somehow
man that first image is very unnerving, uncanny if you will, which totally fits with the "fake human" vibe of the page. remind me to not drink water ever again /j
Not only was the concept probably my favorite in recent pages, the execution was great too! I especially like the ending line :3
I love ending lines, and I give yours a solid 9/10
My original research into Mothman indicated the creature's eyes were not self-luminous, but glowed red due to its tapetum lucidum. [https://www.anomalist.com/features/motheyes.html] Your article reminded me about not consuming food and drink offered by the fairy folk.
Nice job!
Your friend and colleague,
Goerman
http://backrooms-wiki.wikidot.com/goerman
I do have a major problem with the capitalisation convention used here, the distinction is totally lost when typing in all caps for example (and this is something to shout about, isn't it?)
It is a concept I really jive with, and reminds me of stuff we were gonna do on Outspacer if you remember. I honestly wish it was a part of some cool almond water rewrite or had any chance of becoming majorly site canon, but it seems to me that it leaves a Backrooms so inhospitable that organisations are unlikely to reach the level of power that they seem to have in the wiki at large. I'd like to promote this concept's wider adoption anyway, though.
I had a tale about kids in the Backrooms losing their parents a long time ago, I might dust it off.
You promised you'd take me there again some day… but you never did.
Argh that's fair.
I really couldn't come up with a different name than Wanderers. I considered "Travellers," but associating a name that's commonly associated with the Romani with heartless humanoids seemed… insensitive. Perhaps Nomads instead?
It's chill if this doesn't become widely accepted canon. I expected that reaction when I wrote it, and so it doesn't bother me too much. Perhaps it inspires someone though.
coming from Ireland, i definitely agree that "traveller" would be insensitive.
that being said, i think nomad has the same problem. but anyway, this doesn't seem to be the most important part of the change in behaviour of the entities from humans.
humans in the backrooms usually are already nomadic — they all start that way even if they settle later, but the idea that most people settle (especially if this transformation is actively capping the extent to which the settled groups could even continue to exist and popularise the settled lifestyle) is a bit ridiculous
so instead i think the name should describe something else more important about them. hehe i'd have gone with "stonecolds" or something like that :-)
You promised you'd take me there again some day… but you never did.
Ah thanks. That does help! I'll ponder about it.
Great image and I really wanted to like this page, but several things don't feel right to me personally:
- "Wanderer" has long been adopted as a simple moniker for "humans in the Backrooms." In universe, it'd be illogical to name a whole entity species the exact same way. Like imagine if the Wretches were called Humanns and you'd have to specify verbally "Oh I saw a group of Humanns, aka the zombie entities, aka spelled with 2 n's" lol
- The capitalization dinstinction works exclusively on text, as long as it's not in all caps or starting a sentence, but not at all in spoken language where it would be even more important to be able to clearly distinguish what you're talking about. This is a MEG article, aren't they supposed to ensure minimal confusion in their catalogs?
- Must drink almond water to survive -> but that will eventually turn you into an inhuman entity -> is the message here that you either die a human or live on as something else? Solitary, selfish, emotionally stunted = not human? Idk, to me that's just another side of humanity, born out of a survival instinct when facing a foreign environment.
- This seems more fitting as a Phenomenon, as it transforms someone by drinking Almond Water over a potentially looong period of time, but still retains most human properties (I'm thinking of the Infinite Wanderer)
anyway that's just my opinion😭
Nah it's cool. Thanks for reading!
- This is absolutely me being petty and childish and a bit of a stinker when it comes to the name. I specifically named them that way to force people to capitalize entity names, haha. I'll probably change it eventually.
- You got a point there!
- That's actually the point of the page, just taken to an extreme.
- Oh, you're the first person who suggested that. I wanted the focus to be on the entity that results from it rather than the process. If it was meant to focus on the process, then it should be a phenomenon.
Thanks for your feedback!
Essentially, humans and Wanderers. (Entity 79) are 2 complete species? Is this a take? Another canon?
I suppose? I have no desire to make it into a canon. But if someone else likes the idea, they can spin off it
This is a post, and this post likes your page. But needs a new name, since its actual name is a copy 👍
I love the tone and world-building implications here, but I have a few issues with the presentation.
The elements I liked:
- I like how the article seems to take jabs at how humans acted in interview logs spawning from the early writing of the site. From the trade of one bottle of almond water for information, to the standing aside and watching someone die, this page cleverly takes inspiration from familiar tropes and spins a believable in-universe explanation for their existence.
- The removal of the inevitability of becoming a Wanderer. This adds a lot of sweet tension to the latter half of the page, as the M.E.G. scrambles to find an alternative to their cure-all food source. It feels like both a pressing conflict at the climax of this article, and an invitation for others to fill out that part of the lore. The previous iteration also had the issue of removing the agency of the wanderers who became Wanderers1, which this page thankfully remedies by making it avoidable, albeit difficult.
- How subtle the transformation into a Wanderer is. Everything behavior-wise is left unclear; it's not actually that far off from the baseline of ordinary human selfishness and snapping under the pressure of the situation. You could go halfway through the article and still question whether the condition exists or not, which I think plays to its strengths? The uncertainty benefits the slow build of dread as you reveal that most people become Wanderers in a decade. The only definite thing biology-wise are the alterations to the eyes, which, I would've preferred if it was also left ambiguous (like the eyes of Wanderers being more susceptible to reflect weirdly under flashing cameras, i.e. the red-eye effect). But that's neither here nor there.
The elements I disliked:
- Wanderers. Seriously, imagine shouting, "I saw Wanderers around [X] level!/Oh my god, is that a Wanderer?/I got attacked by a Wanderer!" I would strongly advise a similar alternative like Wandering Syndrome (with people affected being referred to as The Wandering or something). Also, consider translations of this page into languages without capitalization.
- The interview feels a bit corny and falls flat because we actually don't know Doctor Daniels prior to his transformation. In my opinion, it's like killing off a character in the very log they appear. The reader doesn't get the time to bond with the man Daniels was prior to getting afflicted with the phenomenon and starting to believe generic Wanderer stuff.
- And speaking of which, some people above mentioned that this article might work better in the phenomenon category. I don't know if I agree with that. On one hand, wretches, another phenomenon that converts humans into entities, is listed under the entity category. On the other, wretches are indisputably inhuman monsters, while Wanderers reflect a preexisting side of humanity forced out in extreme circumstances. So ultimately, I believe the choice is up to you, and what aspects of the concept you would like to highlight for the reader.
Overall, I'm rating this a -12, on the verge of a +1.
-1
Is this an actual entity or just a philosophical take on how humans who wander levels and never settle in are insensitive and cynical?
/forum/t-16939815/entity-79-wanderers#post-