I mean what does evil even mean here?
Apparently killing goblin kids is fine. But killing tieflings is supposed to be bad. Why?
By what moral standard can you tell me that killing both tieflings and goblins is not a moral act? They are both non-human species with a bent towards exploitation (the tieflings already prepare to assassinate Kagha, and their kids already started a thieves guild, full of criminal youth).
By what moral standard can you tell me that Kagha is evil but Halsin is not? Kagha embodies the natural principle of competition for resources, which is totally in line with Sylvanus, a god totally detached from morality. Halsin in the emantime was quick to abandon his responsibilities and if you sace him he will be quick to do so again.
In fact, the more I play the game the more I realize that the only good aligned NPC-s we probably meet are Mayrina's brothers who risk life and limb to save their sister. If I really thought very hard I could probably find more, but probably not too many more.
I don't think this game will be a classical black and white morality play. I think even as an Absolutist you can be more or less ruthless in how you approach things.
I think most people define the lines in terms of who is the aggressor and who they serve...so goblins are the aggressive faction while tieflings want to be left alone and goblins are working with the absolute, the dead three...the gods of Murder, Death, and Tyranny...possibly even Shar, the most evil deity in D&D, may be in there somewhere as her magic is in play with the tadpoles and nobody uses her magic without her permission. Plus killing the goblins can be considered just self defense here. But I think if you want to play evil you should just have fun with it, I know I will. My goal is to infiltrate the cult of the Absolute and attempt to take power at any and all costs...I am not interested in justifying my in game actions any more than the dead three are.
