Don't hate... Appreciate....

[Peanut]

Try Battletech or Shadow runner.

[AoM]

Or Nobilis if you don't want to use dice.

[Wolf]

My two cents (which probably isn't even worth half of a millionth of a cent in the international economic system ):
The one who brought up the alignments seems to merely have "borrowed" the system of alignments, with the purpose of categorizing characters.
As I see it, that hardly forces Cantr to have to adopt the whole ruleset of D&D, and that would even be impossible as both games are on opposite ends of the spectrum.

Cantr is freeform, the rp is fully based on the players and their characters.
There's nothing "set in stone", so to say; the administration makes a handful of rules/guidelines, but these can change as the need arises.
And the administration can play the game themselves, without breaking any rules or getting into any "conflicting interests"-thing.
(that doesn't mean that those in PD for example, aren't being watched like mad by others).

D&D, and the other games on that end of the spectrum, are pretty much pre-built, with pre-determined races, classes, powers, npc's, monsters, spells, whatever.
And there's a central person calling the shots (the dungeon master/storyteller/narrator/whatever-the-heck-it's-called-in-other-games).
A storyteller/dm/whatever playing the game himself would undoubtedly lead to a conflict of interests, as he/she would already know in great lenth what was ahead, and what possibilities there were.

Besides, I don't mind a few D&D-based chars, as long as they are being played in Cantr-style.
The mountains could be home to someone playing dwarves...
The forests/woods, well, send in the hot elf chicks...

In short, don't worry... just because someone borrows these terms to categorize how he views certain characters, doesn't mean he's beating you with a bone club until you roll 2D8 +4 for a successful block.
The fact that Cantr is freeform, actually allows anyone to adopt any style as long as it can be done inside Cantr, without forcing others to have to do the same.

Now, a little thing about the evil loners.
They are listed in CE, but couldn't an evil loner also be in LE or in any other category?
For example, I could have a char with dark motives, but who isn't violating local laws, maybe even upholding laws because these laws are assisting him in reaching his goals.
If this char works alone, and still follows laws, or even upholds them, he'd be an evil loner upholding the law - thus, a lawful evil loner.

[Confutus]

Never mind about declared alignments; evil is as evil does.

[SekoETC]

Most "evil" people don't consider themselves evil, they're only taken as such by others. And you know why good always wins? Because the winners make the history, and convince everybody their enemies were the ultimate evil and needed to be destroyed. I believe there's good and bad in all of us, it's a very relative thing.

[ornithopter]

Speaking of Nobilis, one of my Cantr chars is Code of the Wild. Another is Chaotic Neutral, and the third is just built around the twin pillars of meekness and agoraphobia.

So I'd agree with Wolf. Importing these concepts of personality type is just as valid as importing Myers-Briggs (just the types though, not the test itself). It doesn't affect anyone else's view of the game that I used character classes from other games.