Putting what seems like legit characters in a situation that requires some actual thought on which would be the best choice for them or what they care about. This also allows for the morally grey moments Fallout is known for. If they were not then a lot of evil players would have a great deal of difficulty even interacting with them. I also think it is wise to have a lot of the more approachable character remain neutral just from a game design choice. But either way he chose to participate in the atrocity.Ĭook-Cook was literally a deranged serial rapist with a passion for cooking. It is not known if Caesar gave that order or if he opted to do this on his own. Then you have characters like Vulpes, this guy literally murdered an entire town. House may very well be a sociopath businessman with delusions of grand achievements but his actions portrayed an individual that was moving in the right direction. He did so to better his people and bring peace to the wasteland. In Caesars case while he may not have been correct with some of the choices he made. I think the best approach to your question is to determine the individual actions of the characters considered evil.
