So, I've got these two characters, Harry and Martha. Harry's a villain, Martha's a hero, and they're totally okay with each other. Before I ask my main question, I'm gonna talk about their relationship, just to add more context. Harry and Martha aren't actually siblings, they just refer to each other as their sibling (Harry disowned his old family, and Martha never knew hers). You see, they don't really ideologically oppose each other. The problem is that, in Harry's pursuit of his goals, he hurts people. He acknowledges this and accepts that this means that some of the people that come after him have a good reason to, Martha included. Even though they oppose each other, among the named characters, they're the only ones that can understand each other (they've both been shunned from either society, or the people around them for most of their lives). Given this, despite their mutual attempts to do things that will either directly or indirectly harm the other, Harry knows that Martha is the only person he knows that could understand him, and Martha also acknowledges that Harry is the same for her. The thing is, they try to kill each other. It's the last interaction they have, because one of them does kill the other. Okay, more context. Harry's kind of depressed, because his attempts to achieve his goals keep getting thwarted, so he basically tells Martha that this last attempt is his last try; if he can't do it this time, he'll stop trying. After saying this, he asks Martha to kill him if she wins. She agrees. Furthermore, they both know that, if Martha were to live, she'd just keep getting in his way; so she has to die if Harry's ever to achieve his goal. So, basically, before the fight, they agree that the winner kills the loser. Without major spoilers, one of them wins and one of them dies. Ah, right, they're both still totally care about each other like family, and their conversation before this fight is a bittersweet emotional kind, where they don't want to see each other go, but both acknowledge that it's inevitable. I really do think this works for their characters, so I have no problem with the logic behind their agreement. My question is: What're you're thoughts on this? Is this compelling? Do enemies that oppose each other, despite caring about each other, seem too contradictory? Should I maybe have them both care about the same neutral character instead, sort of give them a degree of separation that would be a bit more believable/relatable for more people? Quick Side Note: When typing this thread, I found out that this website apparently doesn't consider "relatable" to be a word, but "meme," "lollygag," and even "reaction channels aren't that bad" are acceptable things to say. Crazy.