Can you expand on what you mean by this?
I’m with you 100% on alignment. In my PF1 games, mortals don’t have alignments, because being mortal means you have a little bit of every alignment in you. Paladins and mid-level priests are an exception, because their deity’s aura influences it. Other than that, it’s something specific to outsiders and undead and other fundamentally supernatural creatures.
I really like your point about gods encompassing both the good and bad aspects of their portfolios. That’s something I hadn’t really thought about before, but now I want to start adapting it. One house rule I use that sort of ties into it is the idea that gods can’t really gatekeep who accesses their power. So long as the worshipper genuinely believes they’re acting in the service of their god, they can access their gods power. That way, there can be zealots of Iomedae who go around burning innocent people at the stake, even though Iomedae herself would abhor that. And there’s a feedback loop where if enough worshippers of Iomedae come to believe that she’s okay with burning heretics, it can change the nature of the goddess herself so that she is okay with burning heretics. This allows for things like schisms and doctrinal drift in a setting where gods are objectively, demonstrably real and reward people who follow them.
I haven’t really played PF2 yet, outside of a one-shot and a campaign that fizzled after two sessions. I’m thinking of running my next campaign using it, though - I really like everything I’ve seen about it.