Chara isn't evil

[rayland]

SPOILERS AHEAD

This is my opinion and something I've been wanting to discuss for a very long time.
There is this idea in the fandom that Chara is some kind of evil child who's obsessed with knives and killing. I don't agree with this view; I think Chara is just a depressed little kid who died trying to save the world.

First, let me address people who think Chara did the genocide run. Why do you think this? It's Frisk that is killing people (or technically the player, but I'll use the player and Frisk interchangeably in this post.) Chara doesn't force Frisk/the player to do anything, it's entirely your choice. I see so many animated Sans battles that portray Frisk as this scared kid that's trying to stop Chara, and it makes me sick. No offense to anyone that thinks this way, but I personally think you've got it all wrong.

Second, Chara appearing at the end of the genocide run: UnderLab on YouTube created a logical theory on this, and I'm using that theory as part of my reasoning. What appears at the end of a genocide run is more like the representation of the stats. This is shown by it calling itself the feeling you get every time a stat increases. And if it is Chara, then it's them being influenced by what Frisk chose. After all, Chara is the narrator (that isn't completely canon, but heavily hinted at in-game); that means they were stuck with Frisk, a murderous child, for who knows how long Frisk was underground. Chara's also just a kid; 13 years old at the most. They are easily swayed. If they see a kid just like them killing people, they think that's just what humans do. See #4 for more on their hatred for humanity.

Third, Chara possess Frisk. Where did this thought even come from? Chara does not possess Frisk, but sees themselves in Frisk. Did this thought come from Flowey calling the player Chara on a genocide run? Because Flowey calls the player Chara on a pacifist run as well, and no one thinks Chara did the pacifist run.

Fourth, Chara's hatred for humanity. Chara obviously came from an abusive family and was trying to kill themselves by climbing Mt. Ebott. With that kind of stuff happening to a child, it's no wonder they hate humans! And then Frisk comes along and murders their entire family. Who wouldn't hate humans after that?

Fifth, Chara poisoning themselves. They literally sacrificed themselves trying to save the Underground; Asriel dying was not part of the plan. Yes, lashing out at the humans was not the best thing to do, but the humans were 1. attacking their adopted brother who had been their best friend when no one else was, and 2. they were humans. See #4 again.

Altogether, I believe that Chara is a very misunderstood character. They didn't always make the best decisions, but they were also just a scared and depressed child. What do you think? I'm excited to start debating!

[uptothewolves]

ok man I agree but who cares its 2019 and Undertale fandom has shrunk a lot since 2015.

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

I think the game doesn’t do a good job at portraying Chara. Mainly because the whole character dynamic between Frisk and Chara is handled like it’s a plot twist. What info there is directly associated with Chara gives the impression that you are supposed to see them as a villain, and that’s all you will get out of it if you’re just casually running through the game. Whereas seeing Chara as an actual character involves a lot more in-depth examination of the game. And maybe that was the point, having to use the morals the game teaches to realize there is more to this character than what is immediately portrayed.

[Soundless1997]

Well in my defense, the part about the genocide route that tricked me into thinking Chara is evil and possessed Frisk into killing everybody is when Flowey literally addressed Frisk as Chara at the end of the Ruins and believes in that for the entire route or even if the genocide route is aborted in Hotland. By doing the latter and then sparing Flowey in the neutral ending, he will be all like "Why, Chara?! We were so close to our victory! Why did you have to screw it up?!"

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

I will also say one thing. It doesn’t really go against your Chara argument, but Frisk is not the player, nor is the player Chara. The player is their own entity controlling Frisk like a puppet. Chara believes that you are Frisk until you complete Genocide, at which point they realize Undertale itself is a game and you are someone else playing it.

This is because the True Reset dialogue makes it clear that you aren’t Frisk, and the Genocide ending makes it clear you aren’t Chara.

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

Originally posted by Soundless1997:

Well in my defense, the part about the genocide route that tricked me into thinking Chara is evil and possessed Frisk into killing everybody is when Flowey literally addressed Frisk as Chara at the end of the Ruins and believes in that for the entire route or even if the genocide route is aborted in Hotland. By doing the latter and then sparing Flowey in the neutral ending, he will be all like "Why, Chara?! We were so close to our victory! Why did you have to screw it up?!"

Pretty much throughout the entire game, Asriel/Flowey believes the player is Chara. The idea being that Chara represents game escapism, or generally the feelings you get from playing games. Chara acted a similar way as a person, so when you play Undertale like a game, Flowey associates you two together.

[rorgfist]

oh boy, here we go again:

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

This is my opinion and something I've been wanting to discuss for a very long time.
There is this idea in the fandom that Chara is some kind of evil child who's obsessed with knives and killing. I don't agree with this view; I think Chara is just a depressed little kid who died trying to save the world.

They are obsessed with killing and raising their stats, they describe themselves as a demon and they want to destroy teh world. Also they are pleased if you do it willingly (more than if they have to force it) and accuse you fo having a sick sentimentality if you bring them back more than once. Also every time they can act they go on a murder rampage, so even if they arent obsessed with killing, they certainly love to do so.

They dont have to be obsessed with knives, thats prue speculation.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

First, let me address people who think Chara did the genocide run. Why do you think this? It's Frisk that is killing people (or technically the player, but I'll use the player and Frisk interchangeably in this post.) Chara doesn't force Frisk/the player to do anything, it's entirely your choice. I see so many animated Sans battles that portray Frisk as this scared kid that's trying to stop Chara, and it makes me sick. No offense to anyone that thinks this way, but I personally think you've got it all wrong.

You do the genocide run, thats a fact.

Chara cant act till the very end, so every time you press FIGHT it is you the one who do it. Completely agreed. The only occasions chara act is when chara (with their signature vertical slash, regardless of what weapong you are wielding) attacks sans, asgore, flowey you and the world.

Every one of charas actions are violent and murdery.

But they dont do the genocide run outside the very end. Even if they are pleased and happy with it.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Second, Chara appearing at the end of the genocide run: UnderLab on YouTube created a logical theory on this, and I'm using that theory as part of my reasoning. What appears at the end of a genocide run is more like the representation of the stats. This is shown by it calling itself the feeling you get every time a stat increases. And if it is Chara, then it's them being influenced by what Frisk chose. After all, Chara is the narrator (that isn't completely canon, but heavily hinted at in-game); that means they were stuck with Frisk, a murderous child, for who knows how long Frisk was underground. Chara's also just a kid; 13 years old at the most. They are easily swayed. If they see a kid just like them killing people, they think that's just what humans do. See #4 for more on their hatred for humanity.

Its not the representations of the stats.

They present themselves as Chara, a demon. the fact that chara also said theya re the feelign you get when increasing stats does not deny or contradict this at all.
Any theory that goes against the direct and clear canonical statements, like the ones from chara, is utterly false.

Ill keep reading, but a conclusion drawn on a false premise is almost invariably false.

There is no point, hint or proof that chara is influenced by frisk AT ALL.

Is chara the narrator? Maybe yes, maybe no. This is an actual theory. A possibility that is hinted (even if not stated) in the game and that may be plausible when reading game phrases.

It could be the narrator yes. Its a good theory.

If chara is a kid thats easily swayed..... Why they NEVER get better regardless of what frisk does?

Do a genocide
Then do 10 true pacifist.

Chara ahve learned nothing but pure good and kindness outside of the first genocide.Arent they easily swayed?
While are they still a murderous demon then?

Sorry, but no. Chara isnt easily swayed and influenced by frisk, and the pacifist route proves it in a 100% undeniable way.

If chara CAN act, they act evil.

the only circumstance in which chara may not act in a completely evil way is when they cannot act at all.

This is, again, canon.

Saying that chara is swayed or influenced by frisk is not.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Third, Chara possess Frisk. Where did this thought even come from? Chara does not possess Frisk, but sees themselves in Frisk. Did this thought come from Flowey calling the player Chara on a genocide run? Because Flowey calls the player Chara on a pacifist run as well, and no one thinks Chara did the pacifist run.

Flowey may think frisk is chara at first, because they are a very similar human. But outside the very beginning, flowey only thinks frisk is chara (adressing him as such, openly interacting with them, referring to them in a friendly and non-murderous way, calling him by the name of chara) in the genocide.

Acting like a genocidal maniac fools flowey into thinking frisk is chara.

Acting nice doesnt, and flowey gets back to act murdery with the human without adressing him as chara or confusing it with chara.

Thats actually a pretty solid proof about chara.

And even if we disregards this entirely, flowey´s words about chara weight INMENSELY less than charas own actions to determine what kind of "demon" chara is.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Fourth, Chara's hatred for humanity. Chara obviously came from an abusive family and was trying to kill themselves by climbing Mt. Ebott. With that kind of stuff happening to a child, it's no wonder they hate humans! And then Frisk comes along and murders their entire family. Who wouldn't hate humans after that?

Obviously? Thats speculation at best.
Its literally impossible to confirm or deny. They could very well have been an orphan, for example.

Anyways, finding a justification about WHY chara is evil does not make them any less evil.

I personally think its a similar scenario to flowey.

Asriel was good in life. He turned into a souless genocidal maniac after death.

The same thing could have happened to Chara. It would make perfect sense, in fact.

Still, finding a justification for their evil actions doesnt make them any less evil.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Fifth, Chara poisoning themselves. They literally sacrificed themselves trying to save the Underground; Asriel dying was not part of the plan. Yes, lashing out at the humans was not the best thing to do, but the humans were 1. attacking their adopted brother who had been their best friend when no one else was, and 2. they were humans. See #4 again.

Chara was literally willing to die if that allowed them to become part of an invincible monster, and use that newfound power to kill humans by the hundreds.

Thats not good, buddy. Thats a hatred that burns with the intensity fo a thousand suns.

"Im willing to die if i take that entire city with me" is not heroic in my book.

Justify that hatred however you want.
Still hatred.

And most importantly.
Even if chara were a nice person before dying (which they probably werent)....

So what?

So was asriel, and flowey is a genocidal maniac.

So could have been living chara, even if demon chara is a genocidal maniac.

Its not incompatible at all, even if you could factually prove that chara was good in life (and you cant), that would still prove nothing about their CURRENT state.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Altogether, I believe that Chara is a very misunderstood character. They didn't always make the best decisions, but they were also just a scared and depressed child. What do you think? I'm excited to start debating!

Unknown would probably be more precise.

They always make the most murderous decission possible given the context, they follow a cristal clear pattern.



My conclusion.
We truly dont know how was chara in life, even if its hinted several times that they werent a good person.

But we know how chara is in the game.

Even if we dont know WHY is chara that way.

We know how chara is.

And its a demon who loves to kill, to increase their stats and to raze entire worlds.

Someone who laughs maniacally while killing in cold blood the closest thing they have to a family.

Even if we dont know WHY they are a murderous demon, we know they are a murderous demon.

They state it themselves.
they actions unequivocally prove it.

And they arent influenced by frisk, as it happens in both pacifist and genocide, as long as chara is able to act on its own.

EDIT: grammar

[DaSwedishGangsta]

but chara killed you in the end

[deab22]

I don't think so

[Mayday39]

I mean my personal opinion on Chara’s morals is kinda like my opinion on Frisk’s gender. It’s whatever the player or creator makes them out to be. You can believe whatever you want and I won’t call you “wrong” since I don’t think that there IS a “wrong” or “right” answer to the question. If asked my stance on whether Chara is evil or not I’d probably say “Eh... it depends.” I mean, before the events of Undertale, Chara killed herself so that the monsters could be free. That’s some pretty insane self-sacrifice, but then there’s the end of the genocide and beginning of any run post-genocide where Chara goes full-psycho and kills everyone.

They are morally ambiguous to me. Which is a pretty good thing in a largely choice based game. Sort of like how Flowey/Asriel is kind of ambiguous since while they used to be a nice little goat boi he’s now a psychotic flower that tries to kill you upon sight, and upon gaining all “7” (technically 6 and a bunch of monster souls) human souls, his first objective is to keep you from finishing the game.

I think the real thing about (probably all of) the characters in Undertale is that their hearts are in the right place and they THINK that they’re doing what they were always meant to, but they’re going about it in the wrong way. Asriel thinks that keeping you from completing the game is the best decision, Flowey thinks he was always meant to kill since he’s a soulless flower that can’t feel. Chara thinks that whatever the player does is right because how could the player be wrong?

God, this became me ranting about how you can still make terrible decisions (and sometimes even a jerk) while still being morally good.

Why did I do this? Even I don’t know.

Another thing I just thought of is that you can consider Chara a Chaotic Neutral character in the beginning. Then, they become a Chaotic Evil character due to whatever inciting event you decide is the culprit.

I really don’t even know what to pin Flowey/Asriel down to since he’s... Confusing. He seemed very clearly a Lawful Good or Neutral Good in the beginning but then kinda slips into insanity. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[rorgfist]

Originally posted by WitheredLily:

I mean my personal opinion on Chara’s morals is kinda like my opinion on Frisk’s gender. It’s whatever the player or creator makes them out to be. You can believe whatever you want and I won’t call you “wrong” since I don’t think that there IS a “wrong” or “right” answer to the question. If asked my stance on whether Chara is evil or not I’d probably say “Eh... it depends.” I mean, before the events of Undertale, Chara killed herself so that the monsters could be free. That’s some pretty insane self-sacrifice, but then there’s the end of the genocide and beginning of any run post-genocide where Chara goes full-psycho and kills everyone.

They are morally ambiguous to me. Which is a pretty good thing in a largely choice based game. Sort of like how Flowey/Asriel is kind of ambiguous since while they used to be a nice little goat boi he’s now a psychotic flower that tries to kill you upon sight, and upon gaining all “7” (technically 6 and a bunch of monster souls) human souls, his first objective is to keep you from finishing the game.

I think the real thing about (probably all of) the characters in Undertale is that their hearts are in the right place and they THINK that they’re doing what they were always meant to, but they’re going about it in the wrong way. Asriel thinks that keeping you from completing the game is the best decision, Flowey thinks he was always meant to kill since he’s a soulless flower that can’t feel. Chara thinks that whatever the player does is right because how could the player be wrong?

God, this became me ranting about how you can still make terrible decisions (and sometimes even a jerk) while still being morally good.

Why did I do this? Even I don’t know.

Another thing I just thought of is that you can consider Chara a Chaotic Neutral character in the beginning. Then, they become a Chaotic Evil character due to whatever inciting event you decide is the culprit.

I really don’t even know what to pin Flowey/Asriel down to since he’s... Confusing. He seemed very clearly a Lawful Good or Neutral Good in the beginning but then kinda slips into insanity. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Just like chara, flowey isnt ambiguous at all, not even a little bit.

Its evil.

There are morally ambiguous characters, like asgore who is willing to murder innocent children to give people hope.


People who kill for fun (like flowey, for example) arent ambiguous at all.

[rayland]

Originally posted by rorgfist:

oh boy, here we go again:

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

This is my opinion and something I've been wanting to discuss for a very long time.
There is this idea in the fandom that Chara is some kind of evil child who's obsessed with knives and killing. I don't agree with this view; I think Chara is just a depressed little kid who died trying to save the world.

They are obsessed with killing and raising their stats, they describe themselves as a demon and they want to destroy teh world. Also they are pleased if you do it willingly (more than if they have to force it) and accuse you fo having a sick sentimentality if you bring them back more than once. Also every time they can act they go on a murder rampage, so even if they arent obsessed with killing, they certainly love to do so.

They dont have to be obsessed with knives, thats prue speculation.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

First, let me address people who think Chara did the genocide run. Why do you think this? It's Frisk that is killing people (or technically the player, but I'll use the player and Frisk interchangeably in this post.) Chara doesn't force Frisk/the player to do anything, it's entirely your choice. I see so many animated Sans battles that portray Frisk as this scared kid that's trying to stop Chara, and it makes me sick. No offense to anyone that thinks this way, but I personally think you've got it all wrong.

You do the genocide run, thats a fact.

Chara cant act till the very end, so every time you press FIGHT it is you the one who do it. Completely agreed. The only occasions chara act is when chara (with their signature vertical slash, regardless of what weapong you are wielding) attacks sans, asgore, flowey you and the world.

Every one of charas actions are violent and murdery.

But they dont do the genocide run outside the very end. Even if they are pleased and happy with it.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Second, Chara appearing at the end of the genocide run: UnderLab on YouTube created a logical theory on this, and I'm using that theory as part of my reasoning. What appears at the end of a genocide run is more like the representation of the stats. This is shown by it calling itself the feeling you get every time a stat increases. And if it is Chara, then it's them being influenced by what Frisk chose. After all, Chara is the narrator (that isn't completely canon, but heavily hinted at in-game); that means they were stuck with Frisk, a murderous child, for who knows how long Frisk was underground. Chara's also just a kid; 13 years old at the most. They are easily swayed. If they see a kid just like them killing people, they think that's just what humans do. See #4 for more on their hatred for humanity.

Its not the representations of the stats.

They present themselves as Chara, a demon. the fact that chara also said theya re the feelign you get when increasing stats does not deny or contradict this at all.
Any theory that goes against the direct and clear canonical statements, like the ones from chara, is utterly false.

Ill keep reading, but a conclusion drawn on a false premise is almost invariably false.

There is no point, hint or proof that chara is influenced by frisk AT ALL.

Is chara the narrator? Maybe yes, maybe no. This is an actual theory. A possibility that is hinted (even if not stated) in the game and that may be plausible when reading game phrases.

It could be the narrator yes. Its a good theory.

If chara is a kid thats easily swayed..... Why they NEVER get better regardless of what frisk does?

Do a genocide
Then do 10 true pacifist.

Chara ahve learned nothing but pure good and kindness outside of the first genocide.Arent they easily swayed?
While are they still a murderous demon then?

Sorry, but no. Chara isnt easily swayed and influenced by frisk, and the pacifist route proves it in a 100% undeniable way.

If chara CAN act, they act evil.

the only circumstance in which chara may not act in a completely evil way is when they cannot act at all.

This is, again, canon.

Saying that chara is swayed or influenced by frisk is not.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Third, Chara possess Frisk. Where did this thought even come from? Chara does not possess Frisk, but sees themselves in Frisk. Did this thought come from Flowey calling the player Chara on a genocide run? Because Flowey calls the player Chara on a pacifist run as well, and no one thinks Chara did the pacifist run.

Flowey may think frisk is chara at first, because they are a very similar human. But outside the very beginning, flowey only thinks frisk is chara (adressing him as such, openly interacting with them, referring to them in a friendly and non-murderous way, calling him by the name of chara) in the genocide.

Acting like a genocidal maniac fools flowey into thinking frisk is chara.

Acting nice doesnt, and flowey gets back to act murdery with the human without adressing him as chara or confusing it with chara.

Thats actually a pretty solid proof about chara.

And even if we disregards this entirely, flowey´s words about chara weight INMENSELY less than charas own actions to determine what kind of "demon" chara is.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Fourth, Chara's hatred for humanity. Chara obviously came from an abusive family and was trying to kill themselves by climbing Mt. Ebott. With that kind of stuff happening to a child, it's no wonder they hate humans! And then Frisk comes along and murders their entire family. Who wouldn't hate humans after that?

Obviously? Thats speculation at best.
Its literally impossible to confirm or deny. They could very well have been an orphan, for example.

Anyways, finding a justification about WHY chara is evil does not make them any less evil.

I personally think its a similar scenario to flowey.

Asriel was good in life. He turned into a souless genocidal maniac after death.

The same thing could have happened to Chara. It would make perfect sense, in fact.

Still, finding a justification for their evil actions doesnt make them any less evil.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Fifth, Chara poisoning themselves. They literally sacrificed themselves trying to save the Underground; Asriel dying was not part of the plan. Yes, lashing out at the humans was not the best thing to do, but the humans were 1. attacking their adopted brother who had been their best friend when no one else was, and 2. they were humans. See #4 again.

Chara was literally willing to die if that allowed them to become part of an invincible monster, and use that newfound power to kill humans by the hundreds.

Thats not good, buddy. Thats a hatred that burns with the intensity fo a thousand suns.

"Im willing to die if i take that entire city with me" is not heroic in my book.

Justify that hatred however you want.
Still hatred.

And most importantly.
Even if chara were a nice person before dying (which they probably werent)....

So what?

So was asriel, and flowey is a genocidal maniac.

So could have been living chara, even if demon chara is a genocidal maniac.

Its not incompatible at all, even if you could factually prove that chara was good in life (and you cant), that would still prove nothing about their CURRENT state.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Altogether, I believe that Chara is a very misunderstood character. They didn't always make the best decisions, but they were also just a scared and depressed child. What do you think? I'm excited to start debating!

Unknown would probably be more precise.

They always make the most murderous decission possible given the context, they follow a cristal clear pattern.



My conclusion.
We truly dont know how was chara in life, even if its hinted several times that they werent a good person.

But we know how chara is in the game.

Even if we dont know WHY is chara that way.

We know how chara is.

And its a demon who loves to kill, to increase their stats and to raze entire worlds.

Someone who laughs maniacally while killing in cold blood the closest thing they have to a family.

Even if we dont know WHY they are a murderous demon, we know they are a murderous demon.

They state it themselves.
they actions unequivocally prove it.

And they arent influenced by frisk, as it happens in both pacifist and genocide, as long as chara is able to act on its own.

EDIT: grammar

These are a lot of great points, however I disagree with some of them.
First off, you say that "every one of Chara's acts are violent and murdery"
The only time Chara ever tries to murder someone is at the end of the genocide run, when they attack you. I'm not counting the humans, because murder is something that has no good reason to do, and they had a pretty valid reason to attack those humans - to save an entire race.

Second of all, you say "Chara was literally willing to die if that allowed them to become part of an invincible monster, and use that newfound power to kill humans by the hundreds."
Where was it ever said that Chara would've used their power to murder people? The entire plan was that they would break the barrier and free all the monsters.

Third of all, you say Chara is "Someone who laughs maniacally while killing in cold blood the closest thing they have to a family." Again. Chara never killed ANYONE except themselves. So... where did you get this from?

Fourth of all, you say that Flowey only refers to Frisk as Chara in the genocide run.
Have you... fought Asriel? The entire reason he's fighting you is because he thinks you're Chara. And that only occurs at the end of a Pacifist run.

Fifth, Toriel herself suggested the same plan Chara tried to do: take one human soul, then go kill six other humans to get more. And no one's saying Toriel is a genocidal maniac because of it.

Sixth, your point about Chara having no soul is a very good point. Chara didn't have a soul when you met them at the end of genocide: this further strengthens my point, as long as I admit that Chara was evil at the end of a genocide run. Which I can agree with now, after reading your argument. But that was because Chara had no soul; just like Flowey. Flowey was a perfectly good monster before he lost his soul. But now he's evil.

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

Originally posted by rorgfist:

Originally posted by WitheredLily:

I mean my personal opinion on Chara’s morals is kinda like my opinion on Frisk’s gender. It’s whatever the player or creator makes them out to be. You can believe whatever you want and I won’t call you “wrong” since I don’t think that there IS a “wrong” or “right” answer to the question. If asked my stance on whether Chara is evil or not I’d probably say “Eh... it depends.” I mean, before the events of Undertale, Chara killed herself so that the monsters could be free. That’s some pretty insane self-sacrifice, but then there’s the end of the genocide and beginning of any run post-genocide where Chara goes full-psycho and kills everyone.

They are morally ambiguous to me. Which is a pretty good thing in a largely choice based game. Sort of like how Flowey/Asriel is kind of ambiguous since while they used to be a nice little goat boi he’s now a psychotic flower that tries to kill you upon sight, and upon gaining all “7” (technically 6 and a bunch of monster souls) human souls, his first objective is to keep you from finishing the game.

I think the real thing about (probably all of) the characters in Undertale is that their hearts are in the right place and they THINK that they’re doing what they were always meant to, but they’re going about it in the wrong way. Asriel thinks that keeping you from completing the game is the best decision, Flowey thinks he was always meant to kill since he’s a soulless flower that can’t feel. Chara thinks that whatever the player does is right because how could the player be wrong?

God, this became me ranting about how you can still make terrible decisions (and sometimes even a jerk) while still being morally good.

Why did I do this? Even I don’t know.

Another thing I just thought of is that you can consider Chara a Chaotic Neutral character in the beginning. Then, they become a Chaotic Evil character due to whatever inciting event you decide is the culprit.

I really don’t even know what to pin Flowey/Asriel down to since he’s... Confusing. He seemed very clearly a Lawful Good or Neutral Good in the beginning but then kinda slips into insanity. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Just like chara, flowey isnt ambiguous at all, not even a little bit.

Its evil.

There are morally ambiguous characters, like asgore who is willing to murder innocent children to give people hope.


People who kill for fun (like flowey, for example) arent ambiguous at all.

Flowey does terrible things to you, but there are things you have to keep in mind.

Flowey knows he can’t kill you permanently, nor does he even want to.

Flowey believes his “kill or be killed” mantra, because when he was nice to the humans trying to attack him, both he and their sibling died. Flowey is attempting to make you see the world as he does, because he believes it will be beneficial to you.

Flowey’s ultimate goal is to free the monsters. Yes, he claims to do it because he thinks the humans would fight back, but it’s unlikely that would happen if it doesn’t in the pacifist ending. He could also just be saying this to appeal to you since it’s the genocide route. (especially considering he follows it up by wanting them to settle down somewhere and not kill anyone)

[(Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr]

Originally posted by rorgfist:

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

This is my opinion and something I've been wanting to discuss for a very long time.
There is this idea in the fandom that Chara is some kind of evil child who's obsessed with knives and killing. I don't agree with this view; I think Chara is just a depressed little kid who died trying to save the world.

They are obsessed with killing and raising their stats, they describe themselves as a demon and they want to destroy teh world. Also they are pleased if you do it willingly (more than if they have to force it) and accuse you fo having a sick sentimentality if you bring them back more than once. Also every time they can act they go on a murder rampage, so even if they arent obsessed with killing, they certainly love to do so.

They dont have to be obsessed with knives, thats pure speculation.

So we need to make a clear distinction here. The Chara in and after the Genocide Route might as well be a different character than the one that grew up with Asriel. Chara in and after the genocide route becomes “evil” while being influenced by the actions of the player i.e. Chara treats Undertale like a game because you treated it like a game, it doesn’t matter how many times you do Pacifist after that point. You’re just playing the game. They become fully aware of this and suggest that you, the player, should just move on to something else. When you don’t move on and instead keep bringing the characters back to play with their lives more, that is what Chara is referring to you as having a “perverted sentimentality”.

Anyway, yes post genocide Chara is evil, but only because you made them that way through your actions. If you don’t do genocide, they are just neutral like Asgore. Everyone knows during and post genocide Chara is evil, no one sensible is going to argue that. This is about how Chara was as an actual person when they were still alive.

[rorgfist]

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

These are a lot of great points, however I disagree with some of them.
First off, you say that "every one of Chara's acts are violent and murdery"
The only time Chara ever tries to murder someone is at the end of the genocide run, when they attack you. I'm not counting the humans, because murder is something that has no good reason to do, and they had a pretty valid reason to attack those humans - to save an entire race.

I was very tempted to split this paragraph in 3

1 killing monster for no good reason at the end of pacifist also counts as evil.
Their laughter wasnt a happy laugh, it was an evil laugh.
See official art for the picture if you need extra tips besides whats already cristal clear in the game (the only thing you dont see is the actual act).

Anyways its impossible to disagree that they eyes and laughter and clearly depicted as evil ones, and the picture in the official undertale store is also pretty graphic.

2 Murdering INNOCENT humans definitely counts as evil. This isnt even debatable.
Murdering non-murderous humans is also evil, even if they are racist and despise monsters.
This is hardly debatable.
Murdering criminals is debatable at the very best, and generally evil unless thy are absolute unredeemable monsters.

3 Theres no need to murder humans to save any race, including monsters, so that point is also completely unvalid. Also, exterminate billions of sentients beings to save thousands of sentient beigns will be also EVIL. Even in the event that it was necessary to save those thousands.
(and still, no need to murder humans to save monsters, see pacifist route.)

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Second of all, you say "Chara was literally willing to die if that allowed them to become part of an invincible monster, and use that newfound power to kill humans by the hundreds."
Where was it ever said that Chara would've used their power to murder people? The entire plan was that they would break the barrier and free all the monsters.

Yeah, that was the plan Asriel had in mind.

Chara has entirely and much more murderous plans, and revealed when they reached the human town. (they had a lot of power and could have ran away from the town, for example)

Asriel plans doesnt justify Charas plans, Asriel actions doesnt justify Charas actions.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Third of all, you say Chara is "Someone who laughs maniacally while killing in cold blood the closest thing they have to a family." Again. Chara never killed ANYONE except themselves. So... where did you get this from?

Chara kills sans, asgore and flowey in fron of your very own eyes (and you know its chara and not frisk because it isnt frisk attack, its chara signature vertical slash REGARDLESS OF WHAT WEAPON YOU HVE EQUIPPED)

Equip the tough glove for fighting sans, (or the notebook, anything with a non-slash attack graphic). IF its you or frisk killing sans, asgore and flowey, the attack graphics of the tough glove (or weapon) will play.
If its chara, chara signature slash will play.

Spoiler alert, its chara signature slash (which they can perform even without weapons) regardless of the weapon you have equipped.

They also destroy the entire world on their own initiative and even if you dont agree.

And they also murder people on full pacifist.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Fourth of all, you say that Flowey only refers to Frisk as Chara in the genocide run.
Have you... fought Asriel? The entire reason he's fighting you is because he thinks you're Chara. And that only occurs at the end of a Pacifist run.

Then he thinks you are chara in both routes (regardless of if you are a saint or a demon) and thus cant be used to prove chara was either good or bad.

Works for me. I have plenty of other stuff going for me.

Not to mention even if you could prove chara was a good person while alive, that still doesnt prove they are a good person now that they are a souless entity like flowey.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Fifth, Toriel herself suggested the same plan Chara tried to do: take one human soul, then go kill six other humans to get more. And no one's saying Toriel is a genocidal maniac because of it.

Toriel never suggested that plan. She accused Asgore of not wanting to break the barrier, and thus, killing only to disguise his true intentions. Ill quote toriel word by word.

"You pathetic whelp. If you really wanted to free our kind....You could have gone through the barrier after you got one soul, taken six souls from the humans, then come back and freed everyone peacefully. But instead you made everyone live in despair. Because you would rather wait here, meekly hoping another human never comes."

And Asgore admits she is right.

And she is 100% right. Gerson also confirms that Asgore have no intention of leaving the underground if he can help it. Toriel called on Asgore hypocrisy, she wasnt suggesting murder at all, she even directly states us that she tried to save each adn every child, that she wants no more deaths etc at the beginning of the game.

Also last but not least, X or Y character being evil or not does not exonerate Chara in the slightest.

If someone murders X amount of people in a school "theres another guy who killed more people/who also killed people" is not a valid defense argument in any tribunal.

Each and every character deserves an individual judgment.
Asgore being evil or not does not make chara any more or any less evil.
Ill say even more.
[inser any character here but chara] being [insert adjetive here] doesnt make chara any more or any less evil.

Only charas actions make chara more or less evil.

Originally posted by HunterNotFrisk:

Sixth, your point about Chara having no soul is a very good point. Chara didn't have a soul when you met them at the end of genocide: this further strengthens my point, as long as I admit that Chara was evil at the end of a genocide run. Which I can agree with now, after reading your argument. But that was because Chara had no soul; just like Flowey. Flowey was a perfectly good monster before he lost his soul. But now he's evil.

Indeed the evil chara is the souless chara, i also agree to it.

We dont know (we can speculate, but we dont know) how chara were when alive.

they could have been good
they could have been bad
Or they could simply have been depressed as duck

But in the game events (after being dead and without a soul for an undisclosed amount if time), they bucher 3 characters before your own eyes and then destroys the world. (they also kill you, but that specific death can be justified imo)

[rorgfist]

Originally posted by (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr:

Flowey does terrible things to you, but there are things you have to keep in mind.

Flowey knows he can’t kill you permanently, nor does he even want to.

False, the first time they ever tried to kill you, before meeting toriel, they didnt even realized they couldnt SAVE and LOAD anymore. He himself admitted later than he realizad LATER he lost his power.

They thought you were an ordinary human and they could kill you easily, and they TRIED to kill you.

Also when he thinks he can kill you because he have the power of reset again, (and thus you cant reset, he can), he still kills you for fun. He even allows you to recover so he can kill you thousands of times ad he himself states.

Thats evil.

Actually, the only situations in which flowey doesnt try to murder you is precisely when he thinks he cant kill you (the first time, before realizing you can SAVE, the omega flowey time, when HE and not you can SAVE, and the god of the hyperdeath one)

Whenever he knows he cant kill you, he doesnt even try. As proven when he have no souls and already knows you can SAVE (after Toriel) or as proven when he knows the souls will revolt again.

Its actually the exact opposite to what you said.

Originally posted by (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr:

Flowey believes his “kill or be killed” mantra, because when he was nice to the humans trying to attack him, both he and their sibling died. Flowey is attempting to make you see the world as he does, because he believes it will be beneficial to you.

"Cool motive, still murder"

Cool reasoning, still evil.

"This specific group of humans attacked me, so now i kill innocents for fun" isnt justifiable as anything other than evil.

Originally posted by (Edgy) Asriel Dreemurr:

Flowey’s ultimate goal is to free the monsters. Yes, he claims to do it because he thinks the humans would fight back, but it’s unlikely that would happen if it doesn’t in the pacifist ending. He could also just be saying this to appeal to you since it’s the genocide route. (especially considering he follows it up by wanting them to settle down somewhere and not kill anyone)

False, his goal was never to free monsters, in fact, even when he have the power, he doesnt want to do it unless you beat him.

Flowey never had any intention EVER of freeing the monsters.

I think you are getting confused with asriel.