Alignment

All characters have an alignment. Alignment broadly determines the character’s outlook and the likely range of responses that they will have to any given situation.

Alignment is based on two scales of three options each that can be combined to yield a total set of nine different alignments. First there is the basic morality Scale that determines whether he follows the forces of Light or Darkness:

'''Good ↔ Neutral ↔ Evil '''

Then there is the basic Code scale that determine whether he has principles or is random in his acts:

'''Lawful ↔ Neutral ↔ Chaotic '''

This gives the following range of alignments:

Certain supernatural powers are granted only to characters of certain alignments and as such the visible effect of alignment tends to be more obvious to characters with a supernatural leaning as the Deities and Dragons that they serve grant powers only to those of specific alignment. Likewise certain races, notably the supernatural ones, and certain classes are limited in the range of alignments that they may take. Due to their highly adaptive nature Humans, unless they follow a profession that requires a specific alignment, may be of any alignment that they choose. People of a given alignment are expected to try to roleplay in a way appropriate to their choice. Referees will use a character’s alignment as part of the process of judging their behaviour and roleplay, and in severe cases may penalise a character for inappropriate behaviour.

Elaboration
The definitions of different alignments are open to interpretation, but the following attempts to elaborate somewhat on the implications of each choice.

Lawfully-aligned people are behavioural conformists; they do things broadly because society says they should do them. They may do that because they believe the society in question to be moral and benevolent (LG), because they simply consider it to be important to follow the rules/have always done things that way (LN) or because they see ways to benefit personally from social hierarchies (LE).

Chaotically inclined people on the other hand act on a case-by-case basis, as opposed to relying on precedent and consistency. Again their motivation defines the good/evil axis; if they break rules for broadly altruistic reasons, they're probably CG; if they do so for their own benefit, CE; if they do so for the sake of it (perhaps because they genuinely believe following the crowd is a Bad Idea, or perhaps because they're a tad bonkers) and/or really don't care about the big picture, they're probably CN.

Neutral Good and Neutral Evil are harder to pin down. The writer tends to view them as representing a deliberate commitment to the ethical position, which the individual rates above any specific method of achieving it. This definition does flow into CG/CE to some extent, but it implies a considerably greater degree of cognisance and self-knowledge (rather than inattentiveness).