I fully support Clerics being held up to same - or higher - standard than Paladins. In both BG3 and DnD
Realistically, Clerics would be held to a lower standard than Paladins.
Since acting outside of their Deities typical behaviour can be done to facilitate enacting their will.
It's literally the basis of the "Trickery" domain, to use subterfuge. Which might involve acting nice in order to infiltrate.
In fact, it's a similar notion to what "Evil" actually should be, rather than how it's often depicted in D&D related games where it's all about being a "Chaotic Stupid Jerk".
For example, an Evil character in BG3 would likely still save the Tieflings because it's mentioned that Halsin knows information about the parasites, while the Absolutists aren't even aware they exist. Thus saving Halsin furthers an evil character's personal gain by allowing them to better understand their parasite and potentially figure out how to remove it. While an evil character would have nothing to do with the Absolute because they don't provide any benefit at all besides "You can go murder a group of civilians for fun"
Thus being "Nice" furthers the ability for "Evil" due to the increased power gained through knowledge. To say nothing about the allies you gain as a result of these "Nice" actions (Notably, Karlach and Wyll. But also Halsin too) which provides more combat strength than even a camp full of stupid goblins.
Meanwhile, Paladins oaths are very obtuse. It's literally "Act this exact way no matter what" with no regard to consequences only your specific actions (Which can often lead to accidental oathbreaks when people take into consideration consequences instead of blindly following their tenets to the letter)
