I have seen some people suggesting that characters like TDL shouldn't be redeemed because "he is named The Dark Lord, so it implies that he is irredeemable " or that "The Dark Lord is made to be evil because Alan gave him the mission to destroy TCO, so that flattens him to a simple pure evil villain". But I think one of the most fascinating questions and themes of AvA that Alan has portrayed is:

"Do you have the free will to make the right and wrong decisions or are you just a product of your situations?"

This question has been a conflict for our Hollow Head cast (TSC, TCO, Victim) minus TDL at major points in the story. The story creates situations for our characters to fit into their certain roles:

• Victim is forced to be a victim (whether it be by physical pain, emotional pain, grief, loss, existential crisis, etc.).
• TCO is at the center of most of the conflicts and made to clash with people constantly (both by choice and due to past actions).
• TSC gets brought into the outer net by TCO to save him even though TSC didn't want to be involved initially.

Victim: Defiance

Victim is the clearest example of: "My labels don't decide my fate; I am the one that writes my own destiny".

After Victim escaped Alans PC in 2007 and arrived in new grounds, he didn't extend his suffering onto others like people expected. Rather, he chose to embrace the positives in his life (like Mitsi, Agent, his employees, etc.). Even after Mitsi's death (when we expect him to start his villain arc), he has shown an exceptional amount of restraint over his actions. He knows what proportional response to harm is. He knows the difference between neutralizing a threat and destroying it (like when he renamed TCO instead of using the CUT on him). Victim actively defies the "Tragic Victim turns evil" trope that he is normally associated with. In fact, he literally changes his name from "victim" to "h4ck3r". He straight up rejects the identity that Alan gave him to embrace himself for who he wants to be:
"A fighter trying to avenge his loved one rather than a helpless Victim that becomes evil because he suffered pointlessly."

The Chosen One: Coexistence

In fiction, TCO is a trope given to a character with purpose bestowed upon it by a higher power and the situations force that character towards that said purpose. In the case of our TCO though, that purpose isn't any heroic or villainous one like we normally expect. It is just "torture". Alan made it very clear regarding why he made TCO in AVA ep-2:"He made him as a more powerful dummy than Victim, JUST a stronger punching bag to torture". TCO was put in that situation to fight against his will. He was given powers; Alan was ready to fight with his arsenal and the desktop applications also joined in. It looked like TCO was a troublemaker but in reality, he never really wanted any of this. He just wanted to live in peace without being a hero or villain, just a peaceful person.

He still did many bad things with TDL and Victim is indeed morally justified regarding TCO, but he still redeemed himself by saving everyone at the cost of his friendship with TDL and that should also be considered. However, unlike Victim who defied his fate of being a victim, TCO learnt to coexist with his status as "The Chosen One". In AvM ep-0, we see TCO using his fire to light up the caves instead of Minecraft torches. He integrates his powers into his daily life and makes peace with Alan by saving him from the virabot.

The Second Coming: Confrontation

I think we can say that TSC is in the middle of this conflict currently in the story. He only learnt about his powers recently and he doesn't know that he is "The Chosen One's return". As he made peace with Alan by animating with him, TSC never needed to confront his name and code as he was enjoying his life with the color gang. But the situation (In this case, TCO) has brought him back to the outer net to confront his destiny. He has two examples to review what he would do when he realizes what his code is: would he defy it like Victim or learn to coexist with it like TCO.

NOW, there is one other response that I haven't talked about: EMBRACEMENT. Rather than defying or just coexisting with your fate, you embrace it and accept it as your ultimate purpose. And TDL is exactly that. He never got any criticism for his actions and the only friend he ever had (TCO) did not guide him on what is right or wrong (TCO definitely doesn't get the entire blame as he had his own trauma, but he is still very much partly responsible for TDL's eventual actions). Also, he was friends with TCO for a very long time even though his mission is to destroy TCO, so that should honestly disprove the point that his mission has any role to play in his decisions.

Rather than having TDL be irredeemable because "he was made to be evil", he should be "he was made for a purpose, and he embraced it by his own free will".

I definitely want there to be a scene where TCO tries to convince TDL that he can change his ways like he did, but TDL would bury any chance of his redemption by saying-"I am not evil because of my name, or my code. I am evil because I CHOOSE to be. That is my function and I embrace it unlike you who opted out and paid the price ".
There should not be any excuse for whether a character is good/neutral/evil because of their name or code. They have the free will to disobey and make their decisions (moral or not). I do agree that their trauma and suffering can affect their choices, but that makes their choices understandable, not defensible or justifiable (for that we have to look at the actions, intensions and consequences themselves).

By making it clear that TDL became evil by his own choice rather than his name or code, we would have all the three (maybe four) answers of how each character can deal with their fate which is bestowed upon them without their choice-

• They can defy it like Victim
• Coexist with it like TCO or
• Embrace it like TDL

And I believe TSC would make his decision as well later on in the story.

Important insight: None of these choices are automatically wrong btw. That particular fate is what's important here. Victim is totally right for defying to be a Victim. TDL is wrong because his purpose leads to death and destruction.

Conclusion:

The names and code of our hollow head cast only represents their circumstances which are not in their control (like how expectations are put on people who never asked for them). They have their own free will on how they decide to react with it. Think of it like this:

"A character has all the 26 alphabets, but his situations (beyond his control) reduce it down to only 4- A, B, C and D. Now, the character shouldn't be criticized for only having 4 letters. HOWEVER, he should be held responsible for which letter he would pick from those 4 letters"
Just like that, our characters don't have the best set of options due to their situations. But they do have the choice is what they pick from those options, and we should judge them while considering both these points.

Let me know what you think about this.

I believe TDL is trying to convince Victim to fight TSC by framing him as the continuation of the destruction caused by Alan and TCO. He would do it by saying that TSC is their ally and that he saved them (Saving two guilty and evil people (from Victim's POV) isn't necessarily a good thing and an innocent bystander doesn't do that).
Victim might try to verify it himself by scanning TSC as he won't blindly follow anything TDL says without proof. He will scan TSC like here in the newsletter and he would get this: "The Second Coming.exe- The Chosen One's return". That could remove Victim's reluctance of harm towards TSC like before as he could conclude that TSC is the return of what TCO represents: Death, destruction and suffering, which could lead to escalation.
What do you guys think about this?

I think most people already agree that Victim has a point in AvA. The discussions normally revolve around whether his actions are justified or not. Whether he deserved to treat TCO like he did or whether he was right to attack Alan for his suffering or was he reasonable to detain TSC and explaining how he processes such situations is what we normally focus on.

But I don’t think we talk enough about something more important:

• "Why is he the only one acting at all?"

The Outer Net isn’t just broken; it has adapted to being broken:

After everything TDL and TCO did across multiple websites (especially stickpage and new grounds), it should be obvious to expect some kind of reaction from the general public of the Outer Net.

But there isn’t one.

• There is no public authority stepping in to take measures or try to prevent such disasters in the future.
• There is no collective attempt or protest by the public to capture, restrain or punish TCO.
• There is no meaningful response to the scale of destruction that TDL/TCO caused.

I agree there are some media outlets which Victim collected which indeed cover the new grounds massacre by labelling it at "The disintegration". But the media outlets look more interested in covering and speculating about the aftermath of the incident (like Victim becoming CEO and his disappearance) rather than trying to find who is responsible for such an insane tragedy. It doesn’t feel like the outer net society is struggling to respond. It feels like a society that has normalized not responding at all.

The real issue isn’t inability, it’s desensitization:

Its understandable for the public to not directly engage TCO and TDL because they are totally overpowered. However, if this keeps continuing then at some point it stops being:

• "They can’t do anything"

and starts becoming:

• "No one expects anything to be done anymore."

Whether it is the fear of TCO, or desensitization to repeated disasters, it all leads to the same outcome:

"The Outer Net has learned to treat extreme danger as background noise."

Even the Most popular character reflects this:

A surprisingly good example of this is Corn Dog Guy.

On the surface, he’s just a gag and a joke character-he keeps selling corn dogs no matter what is happening around him.

But if you actually look at the context:

• Massive destruction occurs nearby but he doesn't give any reaction to it.
• Dangerous entities like TCO appear but he continues his business as usual
• He is literally ignoring every disaster like it's a random Tuesday and treating it as background noise.

At some point, the joke only works because the world itself behaves like chaos is routine.

That suggests something deeper:

• The Outer Net has become so exposed to casualties that their numbness has even disregarded life-threatening events as not worth reacting to.

And on the other hand, we have Victim:

In that environment, Victim stands out not just because of what he does, but because of what no one else is doing.

Around the time of the new grounds massacre:

• He was not a part of any military, army or a police force, just the co-founder (and then CEO) of a tech company.
• He did not have any army or military grade equipment at that time. It was just his friend agent and the grey worker who helped him rebuild his company after the probable share market collapse.
• He was not like an outsider who saw everything and was safe from the disaster: He is arguably the biggest victim of the massacre.

And yet he is the only one who actually takes initiative against the situation involving TCO.

That creates a more contrary situation:

• The character that was directly affected the most by past events is also the only one willing to fight against it.

This is where the irony becomes important:

Everyone else in the Outer Net:

• Has Either accepted the chaos or avoided engaging with it entirely.

Victim:

• Refuses to accept such actions as normal and takes responsibility to retaliate when no one else will.

So, while it is important to analyze Victim's individual morality, it is just as important to lay emphasis about the context:

• In a world where everyone else has adapted to ignoring danger, what does it mean that only Victim is the one that refuses to accept this "normal" standard?

Why this connects to “The Honored One” idea

I’m NOT saying Victim is “The Honored One.”

But I do think:

• He gets closer to that idea than people are comfortable accepting, not because he is perfectly just, but because he refuses to accept the numbness everyone else has settled into.

His character isn’t just about opposing TCO; it’s about rejecting a system where:

• Destruction is treated as normal.
• Accountability is absent.
• No one has the will to react anymore.

But this doesn’t make things simple:

Being the only one who acts doesn’t automatically make him right and I agree with that.

In fact, it creates a new problem:

• Victim has no external accountability to anyone.
• There is no system to evaluate Victim's decisions.
• There is no guarantee he’s interpreting things correctly and he can be deceived (like by TDL).

Conclusion:

I believe Victim satisfies multiple aspects of being titled "The Honored One". However, I also agree he isn't worthy of such a title YET in the story. His biggest test which would declare whether he deserves such a title or not would be TDL. When Victim would realize about TDL's evil intensions, he would be faced with 2 choices:

1. Choice 1: He separates himself from TDL, accepting his mistake of making the alliance and effectively sacrificing his chance to revive Mitsi. He would choose the morality and righteousness he learned from Mitsi's love over that very love itself.
2. Choice 2: His emotions overpower his morality, and he becomes unfit to support the very cause he started.

Victim would be the only one who makes this decision for himself (no blame game of influence). Choice 1 makes him "The Honored One" and Choice 2 solidifies his tragic fall.
Alan has probably decided which option Victim picks, So what do YOU think Victim should do?