Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/47024
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/47024
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Congratulations! Seems that you have a story with a vary conflicting, gray scale of morals. That's usually a good sign.

Coming to your question,

## I'd say your hero is an anti-hero,

or rather a revenge-driven hero. You mention him having a strong sense of justice, yet he has no problem on killing (so using any mean to an end) and it seems driven mostly by personal revenge (something that rarely goes along with justice, in a law-abiding sense). As you mentioned, the protagonist never stopped considering if the scientist plan was good, misguided or bad. He just cared for revenge. He can be charismatic as _Edmond Dantès_, but it has some markings of the anti-hero.

As for your villain,

## we could label him as a Well-intentioned Extremist [[TvTropes link]](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WellIntentionedExtremist)

I understand your confusion, since I'm not sure if we should call him a full-fledged villain or an anti-villain. He surely has a lot of anti-villainesque traits, like pursuing a goal that he perceives as "good for humanity at large" and his distaste for violence and murder. Yet of course human experimentation is bad per-se, and we can't judge the morality of his actions with hind-sight (ergo, it's still bad to mass experiment on humanity even if the results turn out to improve everyone's life).

So, they are both in a moral grey area, and both dangling over the "dark" side of a white-black spectrum.

Original score: 3