Right now there is no incentive to play using alignments and I think this is where the new alignment system has failed.
Restrictions and certain alignment mechanics actually made the "Alignment" something tangible and real.
See, this is what I don't quite get. All the earlier posts were talking about how the heart of the alignment system is roleplaying. Shouldn't the only incentive you need to use alignments... be the desire to roleplay those alignments?
Adding in more mechanical elements makes it more problematic for those who
don't want to deal with such things.
Now, I do get the second sentence above - the fact that having mechanical support makes the experience more worthwhile if you
do want to use alignments. And I'd be cool with an optional system that adds in such elements for those who want it.
But that first sentence... that the failure is the lack of 'incentive'... I can't think of any good way to implement such things. Any system that forces or encourages the use of alignment is just going to frustrate those who don't want to deal with it. Indeed, I've only found that such things
impede roleplaying rather than enhance it.
In the end, I'll stick with my previous advice - if you want to roleplay a certain alignment, that's totally up to you, regardless of edition. If you want to have more in-game consequences, mechanical limitations, or other ways to make alignment feel 'relevant'... what you need to do is talk to the
DM, because that is something that should be tied to the campaign, not to the game system itself.