Talk:Axel/@comment-31135394-20200209212311/@comment-27624304-20200209220044

To be honest I really don’t like using the term “evil” at all (or I guess “good” for that matter). Antagonistic is much more objective and relevant to the character’s use in the story. “Evil”, to me, is extremely strong and takes on an almost supernatural/religious tone. You know, like Satan is pure evil. Sure there’s bad people, rearend-holes, jerks, bullies, misguided, naysayers, and so on. (I personally wouldn’t even call Grimmel “evil”, just bad, misguided, arrogant, and a rearend-hole. But he’s not like Satan incarnate).

Axel is a troubled kid, obviously because it is hinted he’s had a poor upbringing. Yes he wants some acceptance and a small amount of care (for the Ramblefang), but he also displays an ease of lying and other behaviors he clearly knows is wrong. He’s not evil, but he is an antagonist or “bad” guy within the story, so if we only have “evil-neutral-good”, I feel “evil” is the closer.