In the know?

I believe the answer is no, unless you're writing in 3rd person omniescent (sp?)
I could be wrong, though.

That would depend on whether or not you want the reader to know that tidbit of information. If you do, then a POV character should know and "tell" the reader. If you don't, then the reader can learn it as the protag does.

Totally up to you what effect you want on the reader.

The only cheat is if you have a deep POV of a character who knows interacting with them and you still hide it from the reader.

Depends on how the story is being told.

Is the protagonist the only point of view character? Is the story being told through the protagonist's eyes (1st person or 3rd person)? If yes, then the reader can only see or know what the POV character knows. But, it's possible to drop hints which the reader might pick up on but the POV character doesn't.

If there's another POV character who knows the secret, then the reader can easily find out the information during one of the scenes when the narrative is through that POV character.

Also, consider why you'd want the reader to know something the protagonist does not. Would it be more exciting for the reader to have the information and wait for the protagonist to find out? Or do you want to have the reader follow along with the story and discover information as the protagonist does?

Good luck on whatever you choose!

*Pudge* said:

"No problem", he shouted after her. She quickened her step tripping slightly in doing so, glancing back his face looked puzzled but amused. Amused! He was laughing at her.

Click to expand...

Not much to go on with this snippet, but I'm assuming "she" is the POV character, and that you're trying for 3rd person limited. In that case, the statement "He was laughing at her" could be thought to be a POV violation (How could she know?), but I see the statement as her guess as to his thoughts. So no, I don't think this snippet would be considered omniscient or a violation.

The action is somewhat confused, though, and there are a couple of punctuation problems.

"No problem," he shouted after her. <note that the comma should go inside the double quotes>

She quickened her step tripping slightly in doing so, glancing back his face looked puzzled but amused.

Too many "-ings". Might be clearer if this became two sentences: "She quickened her step but nearly tripped. When she glanced back, he looked puzzled but amused."

Hope this helps.

Hmmm, I think it would depend on what you want. In Pattricia Wood's The Lottery, the reader knows things the protag does not, but that is because of the protag's mental state. I'm not sure what other situation it would benefit the reader to know something the protag does not. But good luck! As long as you write it the way you want it, I'm sure it'll be great! (And that's really any help...sorry. )

Think of 3rd person limited as the narrator walking through the story while sitting on a single character's shoulder, or sometimes inside the character's head. The only thing the narrator can report on are things the viewpoint character sees/smells/feels/hears/tastes/thinks. It's like what any person does while going through everyday life. The only senses you have access to are your own.

But the thing to remember in the 3rd person limited storytelling style is that you can always change POV characters. It's recommended to switch at definite breaks in the narrative like scene or chapter breaks, otherwise the reader can get confused. Pick the viewpoint character who is best for the scene.

3rd omniscient means the narrator can see and know everything, and can report on the thoughts of every character. God's-eye view. For a beginning writer, this can be tricky to handle.

I suggest looking at some of the stickies at the top of the Writing Novels forum and I believe this one. I've seen several good threads which have examples of all the different viewpoints and the pros and cons.

*Pudge* said:

It does, thank you.

Is it acceptable to use 3rd Person Limited for the duration, with exception to the dialogue?

Click to expand...

Pick whatever viewpoint best fits the story. Just keep the viewpoint consistent.

Not sure what you mean by "with exception to the dialogue". Dialogue is written in present tense as if the character is speaking right now. It represents the character's words, so is somewhat "outside" the narrator's POV. Note, though, that in 3rd limited that the POV character might not hear everything clearly:

As she hurried away from him, her face burning with embarassment, she thought she heard him say something else but couldn't make out the words.

Agreed, there are a lot of buzzwords which can be pretty intimidating.

Suggestion: pick a POV character for your story. Put yourself in that character's shoes, and walk through the story as that character. Then write it down. Simple, right?

If you're new to writing, "just write it down" is one of the best things to do. Also, if you haven't found it yet, the "Learn Writing with Uncle Jim" thread in the Writing Novels forum is a treasure trove of information. To paraphrase Uncle Jim, "I give you permission to write dreck." For first draft, keep the words flowing. Later on you can tweak it to perfection.

Good luck!

*Pudge* said:

"No problem", he shouted after her. She quickened her step tripping slightly in doing so, glancing back his face looked puzzled but amused. Amused! He was laughing at her.

There are probably a million thing's wrong with this insert so forgive me, but is this third person omniscient?

Click to expand...

Here's a word-by-word look at your POV:So far, there's no indication of POV. Everything is external--objective--a neutral description of events. (We can't even be certain it's 3rd person; a 1st person narrator could be describing what two other people are doing.) This isn't a problem. When you break things down as finely as I'm doing here, you'll see many individual sentences that are objective. It only becomes troublesome when there's a long unbroken stretch like that. (There is such a thing as Objective POV, but that's another discussion.) Occasional objective bits are fine as long as you anchor back into the POV frequently.

The way you anchor the POV is to mention something only the POV char can know. Use sensory impressions, all five senses: seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling. Also use internalizations: thoughts and emotions.Now we start to get some POV. Looked tells us two things: we're getting someone's impression, and it can't be "him" (without a mirror, he can't know how his face looks). Puzzled and amused also move away from objective description, into subjective interpretation. But whose? Given the previous portion of the sentence, it's most likely to be "her" (unless someone else is present).This can be read a couple of ways. Taken alone, it could be "his" thought. In context with the rest of the paragraph, though, I think it's clearly "her" internalization, her interpretation of what the expression on his face means. (Again, though, it could also be the internalization of some other person who's watching these two.)

All together, this paragraph is in one char's POV, most likely "her", but just possibly some other char who isn't mentioned here. (In context, it should be obvious which.) No POV problem here.

If so I have read that alot of people dislike reading this style. How do I change it?

Click to expand...

Readers dislike bad omniscient. When a writer takes the trouble to learn (or has the instinct to know) when and how to use it, well-written omniscient is a valid choice. Omniscient does tend to distance the reader from the story, but there are ways to compensate for that.

The issue is that some beginning writers think omniscient ought to be the easiest POV. True, what's hard for me might be easy for you, but it isn't as simple as it looks. There's a lot involved in doing omniscient well.

If your don't let the readers know, you create suspense through mystery.

If you let the readers know, you create suspense through dramatic irony.

Either way. Whatever makes your story work.

(BTW, it doesn't have to be omniscient. The truth could be learned from a different POV character. Now if it's told in 1st person, then there would be a problem, because obviously the narrator can't tell you anything he doesn't already know.)