Don't get me wrong - I absolutely agree that the more recent attempts by wizards to remove the 'evil' from their campaign spaces is harmful to the game overall; we need groups and individuals who can be evil, so that we can have our adventures and, for those seeking them, enjoy a hack and slash quest without getting tangled up in moral grey. Culturally evil Drow, culturally evil Thayans, intrinsically evil planars, and so on; we absolutely need those.
However... the more we paint specific individual groups of these creatures as sapient, personable and cultured in their own way, the less that group falls into the above category. It is the job of the DM to assess what they want to pitch to their players, and if the players are here for a hack and slash adventure without moral greyness, then their DM should pitch the monsters they face accordingly - the goblin tribe they encounter should all be irredeemably murderous and ruthless. Larian chose
Not to do this - but then also chose to incentivise killing the tribe's children, while deny the same action at all for the tiefling group; this moral arbitration by Larian is the problem, not the question of whether one group or another should or should not be killed.
Generally speaking, and I'll spoiler this because it's a tangent and also contains elements of my own moral stance on the matter:
Killing goblins because they are raiders doing harm to others is fine; killing goblins because they are goblins is not. This isn't even a 'new' thing, or related to wizards reduction of alignment presence in their work - it's been a thing since at least 3rd edition, that I know of. Stories and adventures, official ones, have existed since those earlier editions, that explicitly challenge 'all goblins are evil so killing a goblin is always right' mentality in particular; one of the game (I think it was an official nwn module, so 3.5?) told the story of a paladin who failed her final tests because she refused to save a goblin infant from danger, on the grounds that it was a goblin, and therefore evil... her mentor chastised her for this, and was disappointed that she was not prepared to approach her work with the degree of nuance required for one who would act as an arbiter of justice. It's not new. - Remember that the alignment as presented for most humanoids and other creatures that form social structures is an indication of the alignment of those social structures and thus the individuals in them, in majority; it's not a statement of intrinsic or inherent evil per individual, and it never has been for anything other than the creatures specifically called out as being intrinsically aligned (fiends, celestials, etc.)... so it's still entirely possible to tells stories of fighting hordes of evil monsters - most tribes of said creatures that you encounter, and indeed any you end up facing a raiding war band of, will definitely all be of that comfy evil alignment that you can feel safe dealing with... if that's what you wan,t however, and your DM is instead pitching you a goblin tribe that mostly wants to sing and party, get drunk and play games, and who are just trying to scavenge an existence and be left alone... who are perfectly happy to talk to you, and let you drink and play games with them as long as you don't cause trouble... Well, that's an issue you need to take up with your DM, because it's a conflict of game intent.
