The story is a dystopian semi-paranormal novel that could possibly span into a few more books. It tells the story of a man trying to quench his vendetta and bring a group of people to justice after murdering a boy. He hires an accomplice to help him with the dirty work. I was thinking of writing it in First Person from his accomplice's POV. It would be a sort of lament. He's speaking presently after the events have already taken place(but in reference to the past, like an interview). This would be done after opening the book with a scene of his accomplice rummaging through old diaries that were kept by the MC. Then the story itself is a sort of flashback/back-track. My second choice is Third Person Omnipresent, which is simpler. What is your opinion? It's an open field for me because they both have an unlimited "view" of what occurred. Even the First Person narrative because he's reading diaries that explain events that he was not personally present to see, so he can fill in gaps for what he already knows. Thoughts? Thank you.
I would go for first person, so that us, the readers understand what the character is feeling and what he thinks.
I'd say third person limited, or your mc's thought would probably reveal him before you drop the big surprise. (I read your other thread) Using third person would hold the readers in suspence about some things about this character and make them wonder. If your mc is hiding things from everyone, including the readers, I always think third person limited is the best option. You can still make it very personal without revealing the secret.
I think I prefer the first person option. It seems more personal and therefore (in my opinion) seems to better fit a story which begins with one person leafing through personal diaries of someone they knew well. I would like to know, from their point of view, what they were thinking and feeling as they encountered reminders of past times spent together.
