I would put forth that you need to find an alternative method of dealing with good-aligned cabal enemies that doesn't involving killing them. That's why you're good, not neutral. Then in cabal raid situations and the like when you're forced in to fighting them, is the time to roleplay all that remorse.

Spot on. Though I would add that you're never forced into fighting anyone, unless they catch you unawares with a big ass gang and don't give you a chance to flee.

I have no problem with goodie ragers punking goodie mages. And not because they're wearing "rager glasses" wherein those mages appear evil. The goodie rager recognizes that said mages are "good", but that they're "deceived" and are playing with something forbidden and dangerous to the entire world. They must be convinced to cease their dangerous/forbidden activity (possibly through being killed alot) or else destroyed.

My initial thought when I read this paragraph was, "So you're going to throw alignment out the window to kill a dude whose only crime is that he has a different world view than you? How is that the action of a good person?"

The key point here (that both you and Aarn bring up) is the fact that you have to find alternative ways to deal with good aligned mages that don't necessarily involve killing them. But they have to find alternative ways to deal with you - it's a two way street.

If your good-aligned Villager's initial reaction upon stumbling upon a goodie mage somewhere (and I say stumbling because the current Cabal wars setup doesn't present you with any real reasons to raid another Cabal that might have a goodie mage in it) is to try to punk them, that's not acting in accordance with your alignment. And alignment is pretty much Ground Zero in CF as far as RP goes. If you succeeded, would I as a Battle Imm applaud you for killing that mage? You betcha. Would I as a CF Imm slide your alignment towards neutral regardless of any remorse you showed? Almost guaranteed. Conversely, if you engaged in heated conversation with said mage concerning the conflict between your philosophy and his, and didn't kill him, would I as an Evil-aligned Battle Imm applaud you for your restraint and loyalty to the Light? Hell no. Would the Commander be justified in booting your sorry ass? Maybe, depends on his RP. Would I as a CF Imm give you some XP or other type of reward? Almost guaranteed.

Does this conflict between alignment and Cabal goals make playing a good aligned Villager difficult? Hell yes. Does it make it more fun? I'll let you be the judge of that, but if you're at all into RP, I'd say the answer to that is obvious.

Let me edit your last paragraph:

The difference between the good, neutral and evil rager, then, is which outcome is their preference. The good rager would do everything in his power to convince goodie mages that their use of magic is wrong, without resorting to evil acts of his own to convince them of the fact. The neutral rager would probably prefer that goodie mages be purged of their magic and live happily ever after. The evil rager enjoys killing them, and would really rather just destroy them all. He may relish the killing as an end unto itself, not just a means of dissuading people from magic use.

The bottom line to me is, you can convince yourself that magic/orphans/puppies/nature is/are evil all you want, and that's fine. You're what I call 'misguided'. Once you start doing evil things to these groups/concepts/people based on these misguided principles, you're not good anymore.

Obviously I'm not an imm and as such can't set role-play "policy", but that's always the way I've looked at it.

Actually, this is a great discussion thread. Lots here for players and Imms to think about and chew on.

Kastellyn the Devourer of Magic, Lord of Legends