This kind of stuff is why I am glad that alignment isn't so rigid in 5e
We do find out from people that our tadpoles are different and we may not change as soon as expected. However this requires believing these people who are only speculating. No one knows for sure why our tadpoles are different, also why do we automatically believe people who are not experts on this? It could be considered "evil" or "selfish" to bring our potential walking bomb selves around others since we have the potential to destroy them at any point. It may be considered "selfish" to put our situation first but also "good" since we are trying to fix the situation as soon as possible so as to not risk others. It would probably be considered "good" to help the Tieflings but a Druid could find this "evil" because they put the grove first and see the Tieflings as a threat to its existence. One player may take the "good" path and ignore the situation because losing a few Tieflings along the road is a better outcome than potentially destroying all of them and the Druids as well. Another may take the "evil" path and save the Tieflings because they can use this to their advantage later. All of this stuff is a matter of perspective.
