Insight into alignment

[morkendi]

So just for background, we a playing the old Mystara setting converted to 3.5. My question is I am playing a priest of Vanya (for those that know the setting) who basically the god of conquest. So is not evil per se, her religion consists of battle priests, paladins, knights, etc. She does allow followers of any alignment though.

So the mindset of my character is that in order to “conqer” the smart way, I need to find strong allies (the party). I need to build a strong reputation, and it’s best that I manipulate others to make themselves stronger that would in turn benefit me as allies.

So I do things like healing townsfolk, take quest that will get noticed and such. I understand that as a leader, I would prefer respect and loyalty overt fear. But I do these things that would normally be considered good to build that reputation and strength. I don’t do evil things, because it will harm my reputation.

I do treat everyone good mostly, but everything is for my purposes.

[Zanos]

Vanya isn't an evil god at all, she wants her followers to engage in honorable battle and kill their enemies, not burn homes and put innocents to the sword. War isn't considered inherently evil in D&D morality; almost all war gods except the truly deranged tyrants are neutral with respect to Good/Evil. Tempus vs Bane for example in FR. So no, healing your allies and treating them with respect is perfectly in line with her dogma. Frankly, even if your god was outright Evil, not treating your allies like dirt would probably be expected. Even a cleric of Asmodeus isn't going to refuse to heal their allies "because I'm evil!"

[Curse]

The way you describe the character's method is to my mind compatible with a LE or maybe LN alignment. As you write about manipulation for the sake of your own goals it should definitely be lawful but not good (feel free to correct me 😄).
Now the interesting question is: how far are you willing to have your plans directly or indirectly harming others? If you honestly try to avoid casualties for the sake of the lives that will be saved I would tend to LN. If the only reason for saving lives is your reputation it could be LE.
What would your character do when convinced that reputation is not at stake? Imagine a situation where noone will find out what you did and you have the opportunity to secretly kill someone for the sake of your goals. Say a big battle is over and you spot a wounded person in a place behind cover. They didn't see you and neither did anybody else. A sword is sticking out of their body but the wound is not serious enough to be deadly. If the person was dead you had the opportunity to benefit because they stood against you in some way.
Would you heal them? Do nothing to let the situation play out however it would have without you? Would you drive the sword just a few inches deeper so your problem would be out of the way?