Limitations CAN inspire creativity. They can also have no effect, or dull it completely. Just because a limit exists does not mean the product is more creative as a result. If I say "All characters must have only one hand", that can inspire creativity, or trample otherwise brilliant character concepts into the dust.
Likewise, freedom CAN inspire creativity, but does not always do so. The absolute freedom to do whatever you want can lead to dazzling feats of the imagination, or it can leave you aimless and drifting in the sea of possibility or stuck in repeating the same concept over and over.
I'm not really sure how you manage to come up wit the worst examples I could imagine. For one thing the limitation is self imposed, so if you have been limited to one hand it is because you have decided that yourself, unless it happens in game in which case it could still be your fault and probably is. So this obviously would not trample a character concept into the ground, otherwise why would you impose that limitation on yourself?
This was not, however, the scenario you presented in the first paragraph. My statement was in regards to the assertion that when someone imposed limits on another, ie the buyer giving limits to the workers, that it inspired creativity. While it is sometimes possible, it is also possible that limits would interfer with or hinder the production.
This might not be related that much to the topic, but I'm reading Dragon #373, pp. 8-9 "Killer Alignment", which does tackle variations on how this whole alignment stuff could actually help in the roleplaying experience.
Interesting to note these: * Alignments serve as guides to the character's morals and views on ethics & morality * Alignments weren't meant to be roleplaying straightjackets ** Although it was tempting to limit "assassins"/killers to evil alignment, it would limit the potential for interesting concepts ** [Personal Opinion: I'm thinking that if the Paladin lost his alignment the moment he did something "evil", and if killing anyone is considered an evil act unless in self-defense or in protecting the lives of others (which is very vague by the way), PC Paladins should never have been allowed to leave the city gates unless they knock enemies out 90% of the time... unless you also feel that intentionally injuring others is also evil...] * You could actually make a Lawful Good murderer.
EDIT: So do we still need it? Perhaps. Perhaps not. I'd say officially it should still stay, but if your group thinks you might as well ditch it, then go
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
I have found in my own experiences (which have no bearing on anyone else's experiences and are completely one-sided and biased as they are my own), that when presented with limitless options, most players simply get the "deer in the headlights" look and have absolutely no idea where to even begin, let alone complete a character. Limits (or "guidelines" if you prefer a kinder, gentler word) give players a sense of what they can and cannot do...and it gives them something to build on.
I suppose that's something to consider. The "Dear in the headlights" sensation of being overwhelmed. If you tell someone to make a 3.5 character and throw down a pile of all the 3.5 D&D books that have player options in them, that will most certainly be overwhelming. This isn't a matter of creativity, but it is a valid assertion.
They know that they can do A, B, and C, but D, E, and F are off-limits, so they take A, B, and C and make the most of them, usually without ever giving a second thought to D, E, or F. Limits absolutely can and do inspire imagination, improvisation, and creativity. A "no-limits" situation is just begging for the more forwardly-thinking players to take advantage of the system while the "slower" players are left behind to wallow in their Gumpishness.
Again, you're not talking about creativity anymore, you've moved on to the valid discussion of overwhelming the player. But while there is to some extent that you can make analogies from Alignment to another part of the system, this is where you can't. Alignment just isn't entrenched in 4th Edition enough to, when removed, cause the "Deer in the Headlights" sensation. It's the selection of one of five alignments. New roleplayers that never learn of alignments but are told to construct a character personality are not (as far as I reason, so maybe this is wrong) going to be worse off in the creation process than someone who is told to use alignments. What they will be is different, because they won't have this sense of dividing the world into five (or nine) categories of morality. This will affect their roleplaying and the characters they make, but I don't believe that it will impact their character creativity in a negative fashion.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
I have found in my own experiences (which have no bearing on anyone else's experiences and are completely one-sided and biased as they are my own), that when presented with limitless options, most players simply get the "deer in the headlights" look and have absolutely no idea where to even begin, let alone complete a character. Limits (or "guidelines" if you prefer a kinder, gentler word) give players a sense of what they can and cannot do...and it gives them something to build on. They know that they can do A, B, and C, but D, E, and F are off-limits, so they take A, B, and C and make the most of them, usually without ever giving a second thought to D, E, or F. Limits absolutely can and do inspire imagination, improvisation, and creativity. A "no-limits" situation is just begging for the more forwardly-thinking players to take advantage of the system while the "slower" players are left behind to wallow in their Gumpishness.
Depends on whats being limited. With new players dms should ask questions and help the person realize their concepts. Instead of alignment a few questions about moral outlook added to personality would work wonders.
