Alignment rules for Improved Familiar are unclear, help?

[Neo2151]

The feat itself says, "You may choose a familiar with an alignment up to one step away on each alignment axis (lawful through chaotic, good through evil)," however the accompanying table does not match what the Feat describes.

For example, an Almiraj is a Neutral creature, but the Table suggests you can be "Any" alignment.
If you can, as the Feat text suggests, be up to one step away on each alignment axis, then this makes sense.

However, whether "on each axis" means once on each, or just once period has been asked and gone unanswered (the question I found was 4+ years old with no FAQ reply.)

Additionally, this should hold true for all other Neutral options, but it doesn't. For example, the Paracletus Aeon is also Neutral, but it's alignment requirement is listed as "Neutral," not "All."

Furthermore, some creature descriptions suggest you must be a specific alignment to have that creature as a Familiar. For example, the Lyrakien Azata has the text: "A chaotic good 7th-level spellcaster can gain a lyrakien as a familiar if she has the Improved Familiar feat."
Does the specific of the Azata trump the General of the Feat?
Or can you be one step away (such as CG, NG, or CN)?
Or can you be one step away on each axis (which would then include N)?

Many discrepancies, no FAQed answers I can find.
Does clarification exist for this and I missed it, or does Paizo still need to address it?

[The Raven Black]

General = one step on each axis.

Specific = what the description of the creature says.

Specific trumps General.

All those are RAW.

[Neo2151]

I'm admittedly kind of finding it hard to believe that the rule of "specific trumps general" applies in this case, as almost every Improved Familiar option comes with it's own alignment requirement text.
That makes the text of the feat completely unnecessary. :/

[The Archive]

Initially, I was going to dismiss this as somewhat of a silly question. But, looking at an Improved Familiar list, it's a bit of a special mishmash of rules. And it doesn't help that both Archives of Nethys and d20pfsrd look to have some errors in their lists. Nor does the presence of "Neutral," "Any Neutral," and "True Neutral." So, yeah. Have an FAQ.

Personally, I'd stick to running the feat as: unless the familiar specifically breaks the general rules in some fashion, such as the faerie dragon or shadow drake, keep with the two step rule. Because otherwise, as you said, there really isn't much point to having that text.

[Maezer]

Neo2151 wrote:

I'm admittedly kind of finding it hard to believe that the rule of "specific trumps general" applies in this case, as almost every Improved Familiar option comes with it's own alignment requirement text.

Imps don't.

Quasits don't.
Mephits don't.
Elementals don't.
Psuedodragons don't.

I'm not checking them all, but I don't think any of the familiars options without special rules in their bestiary entries allowing them to be familiars (ie not actually listed under the Improved Familiar feat).

If you are depending on specific rules from a different source book to add additional creatures to the improved familiar list, then you need to follow the requirements listed in that particular source which may be more or less restrictive than the default feat allows.