It could be argued that BG3's alignment may not exist as a straightforward value but your character's actions still fall in line within the same old spectrum. Choosing how to deal with the tadpole conundrum could be seen as a lawful/chaotic conflict (resist it and maintain your mental integrity/give in to the powers it promises, for good or ill), whereas siding with the tieflings or the Absolute or whatever other paths there will be are the different shades of good/evil, depending, again, on the character's reasoning. Not having alignment constantly shoved in your face while still maintaining a presense in the background is probably the best of both worlds? Planescape: Torment was subtle enough about it back in the day.
Still, 5e's decision to make alignment barely matter is an... odd one. Unlawful monks and lawful barbarians sure are a twist (as is being able to multiclass these polar opposites). Not sure what to expect out of 6e in that regard. How did Pathfinder's second edition handle it? I am only familiar with the first one.
