Substituting the Heroes, Plus Moral Alignment

[Malcadon]

I like to keep the Hero option as general as possible. Instead of just having The Barbarian, The Dwarf, The Elf and The Wizard, I like to use: The Warrior, The Expert, The Magical Fighter, and The Spellcaster. This allows the players to pickup a figurine, and say something along the lines of "Ooh, I like her! I'll call her Glenda the Enchantress! I'll play her as a 'Good Spellcaster.'" (I will get to Alignment, below.) Basically, this is a simple name-chance of the core Heroes.

Warriors are strong fighting-types, but are fairly simpleminded - they are not stupid, just weak against magical control. Examples include:

Good Warriors: Paladin/Knight/Cavalier, Troll-Slayer.
Neutral Warriors: Amazon, Barbarian, Mercenary.
Evil Warriors: Chaos Warrior, Orc, Beastman.

Experts are good warriors with a skill that sets them apart (like disarming traps, or slight healing by touch - there are others to choose from) Examples include:

Good Experts: Ranger, Templer, Dwarf.
Neutral Experts: Thief/Rogue, Scout, Pirate
Evil Experts: Assassin, Goblin, Ratman.

Magical Fighters are fairly good warriors with limited spellcasting ability, and middle of the road with both skills. They might have a slight magical nature about them. Examples include:

Good Magical Fighters: Elf/Half-elf, Cleric, Druid.
Neutral Magical Fighters: Sorcerer-Prince (think "Elric of Melniboné")
Evil Magical Fighters: Dark Elf Warrior, Cambian (half-demon), Demonette.

Spellcasters are weak fighters and unable to use most weapons and armor, but strong magic-users. They may even be magical by nature. Examples include:

Good Spellcasters: Nymph/Fairy
Neutral Spellcasters: Wizard/Sorcerer/Magician/(any other title the player can thing of)
Evil Spellcasters: Chaos Warlock/Sorcerer, Dark Cultist, Dark Elf Witch, Orc/Goblin Shaman, Chaos Demon.

Although, I avoid using Alignment in D&D (too simplistic, so I instead enforce a basic motivation and personalty type on the PCs) or enforcing one-sided moral behavior like in the DragonStrike game, but somehow I find that it works best for HQ.

Good (or Heroic) characters will not attack other characters or non-evil monsters/people unless threatened (they can still kill Orcs and the like with extreme prejudice), nor can they deny aid (as in, magical healing, or help fighting-off monsters) to anyone who really needs it, without compensation -- charity being it's own reward! The benefits of being a good character are usually better treatment by non-evil NPCs, good henchmen are cheaper, and maybe the availability of quests with the best payouts (like rescuing the virgin princess, recovering a holy relic, etc). The penalty for being cruel or selfish is becoming Neutral and loosing all the benefits.

Neutral (or Antihero) characters can attack other characters or non-evil monsters/people, but will face a penalty for doing to (like not being able to collect rewards or being treated hostility by non-evil NPCs). They may help others freely, or with compensation. They can be selfish, but are not outright cruel. The benefits of being neutral is the freedom to do what you wish with few limitations.

Evil (or Villainous) characters attack anyone, for whatever reason! They are greedy, and would usually demand compensation if they have to stick their neck out for someone. The benefit of being evil is that, you can do whatever the hell you want, people fear you (and respect you because of it), and the availability of quests no good person would ever do (like raiding the royal tomb, stealing the virgin princess... and her virginity, etc). The downside -- besides being treated like an filthy pariah by most people -- is that evil henchmen will not follow you if you appear too soft.

[knightkrawler]

I like to keep the Hero option as general as possible. Instead of just having The Barbarian, The Dwarf, The Elf and The Wizard, I like to use: The Warrior, The Expert, The Magical Fighter, and The Spellcaster. This allows the players to pickup a figurine, and say something along the lines of "Ooh, I like her! I'll call her Glenda the Enchantress! I'll play her as a 'Good Spellcaster.'"

The way I do it. Talk about two people coming up with the same idea.
With me, the Hero Classes are called Fighter (replacing the Barbarian), Rogue (Dwarf with one special general advantage), Adventurer (Elf, including spells or one-per-quest talents), and Spellcaster (Wizard)...

Combined with my Hero Creating system presented here: http://oldscratch.smackwell.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1340777356
I let players choose from my vast collection of Hero miniatures and tell me which Class and race they want to play and within 15 minutes I have stats and starting equipment whipped up for all of them.

The prerogative is: Each of these four classes has to be represented by one hero.

[Daedalus]

That's a nice organization of a simple naming option. The take-it-or-leave-it nature of the options makes it very portable. Heroic and Villianous are nice tags, but Anti-hero sounds off to me. I'd say Mercenary, but maybe that could be confused with the figures--I don't know.

[mikemacdee]

I also disagree with antihero. Antiheroes aren't neutral -- they're essentially bad people who accidentally fall into a heroic role, or do so for personal reasons rather than righteous ones.

I'd advise against alignments in general, actually. All they do is restrict gameplay and cause arguments, and they're not really suited to a dungeon crawl.