Flavour Restrictions

In the 3rd Edition, D&D got rid of a lot of the sillier rules from 2nd Edition. Things like level limits, strict weapon and armour restrictions, and dual-classing vanished. However, the job was left uncomplete, and the existing classes have four (maybe five) flavour restrictions still in place. These really should be eliminated.

Barbarians: starting barbarian characters are illiterate. This reflects their life in a barbaric society, which doesn't place a high value on such things as written language. To get rid of this penalty, they must spend 2 skill points, or take a level in any other class. Of course, since illiteracy doesn't affect combat, this weakness is barely evident. Additionally, it makes no sense - a Fighter from the same culture is assumed to be literate. This detail really should go, replaced by illiteracy dependent on culture, and decided by the DM.

Druids: the only class with strict weapon and armour limits, the druid is also the only class that can never get around these limits. Now, the reason for the spiritual oaths is clearly spelled out, and makes sense from a flavour perspective. That said, why should the game dictate even something like this to the DM? Surely, it's for the DM to decide what weapons druids (and clerics and paladins, for that matter) can and cannot use?

From a pure balance perspective, there is absolutely no harm in allowing the druid to use "banned" weapons - since the martial weapons are all balanced, once you've allowed one (scimitar), you might as well allow them all. Note that I'm not advocating giving proficiency in these weapons - that would still have to be purchased normally. The argument with armour is a bit more complex, since hide armour is the "worst" of the medium armours, so allowing metal armour could cause a significant jump in druid AC values. I would probably advocate reducing the druid to proficiency only in light armour and shields to counter this. However, I do think that the restriction should go.

Monks and Paladins: Two restrictions in one, featuring the limited multiclassing allowed to these characters. This allegedly reflects the greater dedication required to follow the paths of these characters. This is fair enough, but it's a pure flavour thing, and has no place in a 'generic' game. If Monks and Paladins multiclass rather to well with other characters, that's a problem with the class design, and should be changed. But, isn't a Rogue 6/Paladin 3 equally powerful regardless of when he picked up his Paladin levels?

Alignment Restrictions: Finally, and arguably, we have the alignment restrictions assigned to Barbarians, Bards, Clerics, Druids, Monks and, especially, Paladins. These are somewhat trickier to deal with, as removing the Cleric and Paladin restrictions seriously impacts these classes. Therefore, I will defer discussion of this issue until I feel more like it.