This is a trivial problem, but it's starting to trouble me. I'm typing out some plain English details and information about stats and skills in my RPG, and I'm slightly confused about how to best refer to the character that the skills link to. Specifically, I'm not sure if I should refer to the owner of the skills in the third person, or as just "you". For example, I could have this text about accuracy: Measures the ability to aim ranged weapons accurately. The lower this value, the more error can be introduced to your aim. Or this text: Measures the ability to aim ranged weapons accurately. The lower this value, the more error can be introduced to the wielder's aim. This skill applies to every character in the game, and the player may be looking at another character's stats - possibly even an enemy's stats - while reading it. Would it seem strange to look at an enemy's stats and see the word "you" or "your" in a skill's details? For some reason, it doesn't to me. I guess you could say the stat sheets are written "for" the character they apply to, and the human player is just looking at them as a third party. One issue with the second approach is that it's sometimes difficult to refer to the owner of the skill in a way that doesn't sound misleading or confusing. In some cases, the only words that fit are things like "the user", "the individual", "the person", or "this person". Another option, which I've tried and struggled with, is to write the details in a way that completely avoid mentioning the owner of the skills as a person at all: Measures the ability to aim ranged weapons accurately. The lower this value, the more error can be introduced to the aim. Very easy here, but in some situations, it's a pain to do this and keep it easily understood. However, it remains as an option. Any opinions on this minuscule but bothersome issue? Any ideas or advice? For the record, I'm not looking for the most correct style of writing, I'm looking for the most appealing style for a game.

I prefer to read 3rd person descriptions, and between bearer (for items), wearer (for clothing and armour), and wielder (for weapons), I tend to find I have enough ability to refer to the character.

This is only tangantally related, but wouldn't it be better to say "The higher this value, the more accurate your aim," rather than the negative?

3rd person. For personal preference, but also because it leads to less confusion.

In my experience, using "you" leads to a lot more situations where Im confused as to who is being referred to, particularly when two parties are being referred to, or when switching contexts between the information and the in-game.
eg: A description of how someone's accuracy works vs someone else's armour; or a description of a stat using "you" for an enemy after having just read a quest description where "you" referred to the player.

One place I really like direct reference to the reader is describing traits. Here's the description of the "Vexer" trait:

Finding the best way to annoy and provoke your enemies always seems to come naturally for you. Virtually without trying, you often cause your enraged opponents to lose focus and clarity to the point that they can no longer see straight.

For some reason, I find it fun to read in this style. When I try to describe it for a third person, it becomes dry and boring.

Quote:

Original post by Codeka This is only tangantally related, but wouldn't it be better to say "The higher this value, the more accurate your aim," rather than the negative?

Probably. The actual description for accuracy in my game is The ability to line up ranged weapons using hand-eye coordination..

Quote:

Original post by Kest One place I really like direct reference to the reader is describing traits. Here's the description of the "Vexer" trait: Finding the best way to annoy and provoke your enemies always seems to come naturally for you. Virtually without trying, you often cause your enraged opponents to lose focus and clarity to the point that they can no longer see straight.

If these apply also to party characters, I would prefer them to be parameterised by pronoun: Finding the best way to annoy and provoke her/his/your enemies comes naturally to her/him/you. Virtually without trying, she/he/you often cause/cause/causes her/his/your enraged opponents to lose focus and clarity...

Quote:

This skill applies to every character in the game, and the player may be looking at another character's stats - possibly even an enemy's stats - while reading it.

Considering its used as a reference to more than one person i'd choose option 2. I can tell it applies not only to other people but to myself in a generalized way, so there's no need for personalization.

Quote:

Finding the best way to annoy and provoke your enemies always seems to come naturally for you. Virtually without trying, you often cause your enraged opponents to lose focus and clarity to the point that they can no longer see straight.

A more neutral approach could also work:
Finding the best way to annoy and provoke enemies always seems to come naturally. Virtually without trying, opponents become enraged losing focus and clarity to the point that they can no longer see straight.

Quote:

Original post by swiftcoder Finding the best way to annoy and provoke her enemies comes naturally to her. Virtually without trying, she often causes her enraged opponents to lose focus and clarity...

It might just be my imagination, but this particular text seems to lose something when the character is referred to generically this way. However, using their name in place of one he/she might help a lot (see bottom for example).

Quote:

Original post by Gyrthok Finding the best way to annoy and provoke enemies always seems to come naturally. Virtually without trying, opponents become enraged losing focus and clarity to the point that they can no longer see straight.

Well, something needs to change around the "without trying" part (it sounds like the opponents are trying to become enraged), but I think I like this approach better in some cases than referring to the character as he/she.

I could try to use actual names and personal references, but the fact that the name is being swapped when the stat is read from different individuals would be extremely obvious (not sure how much that would cheapen the effect). For instance:

Finding the best way to annoy and provoke enemies always seems to come naturally for B’Elanna. Virtually without trying, she often causes her enraged opponents to lose focus and clarity to the point that they can no longer see straight.

If the ability is a monster, npc or other non-controllable actor, the description should be in 3rd person. If the ability is for one of my controllable characters, then the description should read "you."

Characters that I can control are an extension of me. Characters that I can't (or can only briefly control, like General Leo), aren't. This is the more important distinction, in my opinion. When you're describing something about an extension of me, the player, describe it to me. When you're describing something about an object, monster or other character who is merely an actor in my play, then describe it in the third person.

It depends on the style you want to present the information in. Second person (you, your) works well as does no personal pronouns. Also it is generally a bad idea to include the subject you are describing in the description.

You could present the information as exerts from a guide book in which case second person would be the best choice, you could even have tips and advice after the description to add flavour.

For example:

Accuracy measures your ability to aim ranged weapons, the lower it is the more likely you are to miss the target and shoot yourself in the foot.

Tip: When facing someone with bad aim and a big gun the safest place to be is usual right in front of them – Lucky Bob