Vengeance, Revenge, Retribution

Getting back at someone or something is a powerful driving force behind a character. In games with alignment systems, how does this play out across the board?

Also, general stories about times characters were motivated by such things.

Actions matter, not your goal.

Sure, but what about the context of those actions?

Actions.
Matter.
This is where most "hurp derp alignment" faggots who don't know how they work fuck up.

Check out this lazy post.
Alignments are a part of games that regularly come up on the board. Deal with it. Like it or not, it is in use (sometimes rather poorly), and has particulars.

You say actions matter, not the goal, right?
So if someone captures someone to get back at them, it's the same every time, right? Then the goal of getting someone arrested and the goal of selling someone into slavery to punish their actions aren't relevant?

>I'm going to push ignorant alignment arguments
This is the part where you define what alignments are and how they are applied in your hypothetical situation.
If you are using D&D, then we can go from there.

>In games with alignment systems, how does this play out across the board?
The paladin falls. The rest is just handwaved.

>Then the goal of getting someone arrested and the goal of selling someone into slavery to punish their actions aren't relevant?
Why do you think getting someone arrested or selling someone into slavery aren't actions?

What actions, though? Who and what defines what actions are what alignment? If gods decide what actions are what alignments, aren't they completely arbitrary distinctions?

Most people would say that killing monsters which would kill innocent people is A-okay (Read: Not evil). What if you have a character who honestly enjoys torturing living, sapient creatures to death, but knows that doing so to random civilians would likely get them executed, so instead captures sapient monsters and tortures THEM to death, relishing in their dying screams. Is that... okay? Is that "Good"?

Conversely, imagine a character who's been informed by an infallible being that if the distant progeny of an ancient evil should be allowed to reach their 15th birthday that they'll end the world. This character, seeking to save the world, embarks on a quest to hunt down these descendants and kill them before they turn 15. These individuals aren't presently malicious or have any knowledge of what's up, but it is known for a fact that they'll end the world. Is the hunter evil, because they're hunting and killing innocent people, even if it's the only way to save literally every other person in the world?

>Who and what defines what actions are what alignment?
The game you are playing usually tells you what alignments, if any, mean, and offer broad examples. Meanwhile, you are making an argument based on edge cases that never actually happen and arbitrarily have only the solutions you put out, which is the opposite of what rpgs offer, like every alignment troll.
No more (you)s, user.