At first I'll admit that I haven't read the whole topic yet (I'm currently on the fourth page), so I apologize if I repeat some previoulsly adressed statement.


Anyway here's my opinion:
The OP's problem isn't so much about the "Evil or Not", issue, but rather about the direction of the story. We can safely assume that Giant at the beginning of the strip didn't have the whole OOTSverse as we know it currently in mind, and some characters didn't have their past planned, like Redcloak. He was just a hypercompetent sidekick at the beginning, someone who creates one half of the "straight guy, wacky guy" archetype.
But when the OOTS started to be more complex than "D&D gag-a-day", the Giant added more complexity to Redcloak. We saw why is he working with Xykon, what does he hope to achieve, et cetera. Yes, it wasn't there at the beginning. But there is nothing I'd remember, that contradicts the big picture. The first strips doesn't contradict the latest.

In short: the added depth to the Redcloak doesn't oppose who he become. Therefore his characterization is a good thing. Most of the readers prefer complex Redcloak, to a second-in-command-yup-that's-it redcloak. And it isn't a failure at Rich's part. Many creators does that thing. And everyone here prefers new strips to some polishing of the old, especially if there isn't any real benefit. After all we find everything later.

Thank you and good night. At least here, in my country.