Behold, the exalted weasel!!!
In theory, ravages and afflictions were supposed to cause just suffering/pain/etc. To quote Razia the Archangel from Magic: the Gathering, "Justice is toothless without punishment. Righteousness cannot exist without the suffering of the guilty." (Personally I would have said "Innocence" there since "Righteousness" already means pretty much the same thing that Razia is getting at and so the point is less meaningful than it could have been.)But the biggest issue I had with the series was ravages/afflictions being "good poison" yet causing unjust suffering/pain/etc,
I haven't read all of CD, but I do consider it one of the better supplements based just on the Deities chapter.Personally I find complete divine a far better book then even boed AND bovd was combined. But that's just me.
They may not be intentionally evil, but they were clearly an aberration against life which is too dangerous to permit to exist. Good still has an obligation to destroy such things, although it also should be trying to prevent them from arising in the first place; the rules don't provide any mechanisms to do that. It's possible that there should be a third alignment axis with Nature things on one end and Aberrations and Undead on the other, where they're inimical to life and the natural world but not evil in a moral sense.effectively they were stillborns or something who just want to play/companionship, but end up draining the life from there accidental victims, but they were listed as evil despite the fact they did not even have the intelligence to do it intentionally.