Maj at [unixtime wrote:1154314518[/unixtime]]
No.
I can totally understand wanting to get all Columbine on a group of people, but why are you evil if you don't actually follow through? The description given didn't include a single thing that this guy did towards accomplishing his goal. So he's wandering the world getting horribly rich... And not attacking the people he hates. Until he makes a move, I'm not dumping him into the evil category.
Oh no, that wandering and getting rich part was just an explanation as to why he has money to spend - in the end he very much so ends up torching the place to the ground.
Provided he killed said person because he hates the village(ers) and wants to get revenge, then, yes, I'm dumping him into the evil category. Especially if said villager didn't actually participate in the guy's tormenting.
The dude in the bar, he didn't even know him in the village but skewers him just the same. Why? He's developed such a nurtured hatred of all things related to the village of X that upon remembering it he's more or less entranced in a blood-lusting frenzy of destruction. He no longer sees in color, smells, or feels, he simply kills that which reminded him of the village.
Now, his actions are evil - but I don't think simply calling him evil is enough, it's too much of a blanket statement.
The above example aside (mostly 'cuz it sucks), what about a greedy person? Someone who's willing to trample over others if the reward is great enough (so murder is usually not on his list, but... sayyyy calling the cops on his neighbors isn't too bad, nor is turning in a "friend" for a cash reward, or possibly stealing from someone) - neutral evil... right? What a bout a person who kills people, but is generally a good neighbor and friend... he just happens to love flaying children and eating their innards... not that he does it often... neutral evil... right? The two aren't even comparable...