Yeah, I forgot to mention that I also think you get a bit more flexibility with the 3-point alignment system in that Chaos isn't necessarily EVIL, nor is Lawful always GOOD.  One can certainly have strict, harsh laws and views that are most definitely not what most would consider good for society, though some might.

Spider of Leng wrote:

Another sort of thematic question here: what's your position on alignment?  I started with B/X D&D, but as soon as I started playing AD&D I generally preferred what I considered the more nuanced 9 point system.  When I first encountered the system used in Holmes/Hyperborea, I found it to be a sort of weird middle ground.  But in recent years I've gravitated back towards Law, Neutrality, and Chaos in a sort of cosmic struggle.  And I do like the classic idea of good versus evil; I'm not a huge fan of everything being morally gray.

Others?  Or do you ignore it entirely?

Pretty much use what's in the book, with players choosing LG, CG, N, LE, CE. Honestly though, it's usually not a super huge component at the table apart from perhaps some instances related to magical effects or reaction rolls, because I mainly run the game as a game, not a moral dilemma simulator. Granted, if I have someone consistently doing behavior out of alignment, like a LG that's continually torturing innocent people for money or something, I'd just ask them what's going on, what are we doing here? You can't have it both ways, as there are some mechanical benefits of being aligned a certain way (most obviously Paladin / Fell Paladin for example).