The D&D Alignment system: too restrictive?

[CrimsonTears]

Bards have always been tricky because many people want sometime solid and tactile as a reason. I personally interpreted it somewhat like the monk's restriction in not being able to go back if you take another class (with a few exceptions, yeah)... it's a path that takes dedication and a certain "mindset" to follow... if you stray from that path/mindset, you're "tainted" by other influences and don't have the purity of spirit and objectives to go on with the class.

Except for a bard it's just an alignment mindset. You need the freedom and lack of restrains you only get by being chaotic. If you restrain yourself, part of the "bardic passion" is locked and you can't fully enjoy your inner inspirations... can't get in touch with your muse in the same way, if you will.

Some people find my excuse too metaphisical and romantical to fit and reject it, but it works for me

[Maxx Powers]

My idea for a "simple" alignment system would be three axis:

good .. evil
peaceful .. chaotic
lawful .. criminal

[Neith]

I'm sure this has been mentioned before in this thread: your character mustn't adapt to your alignment. Your alignment must adapt to your character. When you pick an alignment during character creation, you simply pick that fits your character's background. Was he an evil villain that would always scheme against others? LE. Was he a cheerful, albeit short-fused bard?

I hope that in the next patch, or in the next DMFI version, DMs can give out alignment points. The alignment system isn't there for you to roleplay it, at least, not primarily: you roleplay your character. The alignment system is there for it to be coordinated with classes such as paladin or bard.

Look at Aribeth, for example. Yes, a crappy example because she is an NPC. But she fell as a paladin. But why? Wasn't she supposed to be LG? That goes to show you're not restricted to your alignment. You can begin as a naive, overzealous NG druid and end up seeing that your ambitions are empty and become True Neutral.

[Myrddin]

From the Holy DMG, "The rules contained within these pages are a guideline, to be used and referred to as fits your campaign."

[Skink]

the problem is that the "guildline" restricts you abilities to take levels in other classes.... playing a lawfull barbarian is entirely possible... playing a good assassin is also entirely possible...

[Myrddin]

the problem is that the "guildline" restricts you abilities to take levels in other classes.... playing a lawfull barbarian is entirely possible... playing a good assassin is also entirely possible...

That's not D&D, that is NWN. Also, there is nothing under the sun from stopping you from playing a LG Assassin, with the exception of those playing Paladins or others who go around detect evil. In RP it is always the DM staffs call.

As for a Lawful Barbarian, he is in the eyes of himself and his people. It's the rest of the world that is chaos and barbaric.

[Acheron77]

You have to be pretty evil to want to kill people for a living, hence Assassins require PCs to be evil to take levels in it.

However, an Assassin could certainly repent, and become good, but he would no longer search out how to assassinate more effectively.

If you say "but what if I want my Assassin to only murder evil people?" then you should be a fighter, ranger, or fallen paladin.

[undeadsteak]

or a rogue! But yah, Assassins own.

[Myrddin]

Frankly, it is the DM's decisions and calls on the issue that matter more than the limits of NWN or the PnP rules. Just because the engine says Evil, does not mean you're tied to it. If the DM staff rule in your favor, then it doesn't really matter.