Alternative Morality Systems

How do you guys create alternative morality systems? I'm interested more in content than mechanics, but I'd still like to hear whatever you have to offer!

More specifically, I'm wanting to create a Lizardfolk (pic related) character who's morality does not line up with the traditional Lawful/Chaotic, Good/Evil axis, or at least the sins/virtues associated with it, but I'm having a hard time coming up with a enough of an alternative to be satisfied. I'd like my character to act within a framework that is at least comprehensible.

My initial thoughts are that it would be based around perceived "waste". Essentially, Waste/Frugality. To discard things before they're used up is a sin, while using it as long as possible would be a virtue. I imagine my character horrified when the party leaves the enemy corpses where they lie. What sort of twisted being would discard perfectly good food, without even hacking an arm off for later?

Any help expanding on the Waste/Frugality axis, or any alternative axis you could suggest would be really helpful!

Ever play Ultima IV?

Nope!

>Any help expanding on the Waste/Frugality axis, or any alternative axis you could suggest would be really helpful!

Nature vs. Nuture. The Hivers in Traveller practice both in turn with regards to their young.

The Hivers are hermaphroditic. They routinely swap genetic material by "shaking hands" with one of their 6 limbs. After doing so, they drop larvae with no care whatsoever. They care so little about those larvae that they routinely fumigate their ships and installations to kill them.

When/if any larvae make into the wilderness surrounding Hiver "nests" (settlements), they spend several years living scurrying about as scavenging animals growing in size and intelligence. The survivors are eventually impelled to return to whatever "nest" is nearby and only then do the adult Hivers begin caring for and teaching them.

The wilderness period is seen as so important by the Hivers that they regularly import predators to make the live of the larvae more difficult.

Now, echo that attitude in your Lizardfolk. I'm sure you've seen the gauntlet newly hatched sea turtles must run to get to the 'safety" of the ocean. Imagine Lizardfolk eggs hatching and the "sprats" scrambling into the nearest swamp or watercourse through a horde of small predators. After a couple of years, those Lizardfolk juveniles which have been big/nasty/smart/lucky enough to survive, leave the swamp and wander into the nearest Lizardfolk settlement. It's only then that they are begun to be "nurtured" as 'children".

Keeping bottled urine to create poison.
Has a location where he stores corpses, manure and more urine to create gunpowder and other explosives.
Practices necromancy to preserve and resurrect corpses. Has little farm on prairie that no one knows about with fields tilled by the undead for a wide selection of expensive herbs and spices.
Is baffled that Humans are still uncomfortable eating human flesh even after its been converted to beef using alchemy.
Believes that being covered in a special mixture feces makes him invincible when in reality no one wants to touch him.
Unleashed a swarm of locusts on an unsuspecting city.
Has a pharmacy which sells mystery meats and calcium tablets make with the bones of his enemies.
Intentionally loses bets to share his filth.
All plates must be licked in his presence.
Every candle is made with his ear wax and he frequently requests ear wax from party members or takes it in their sleep.
Everything he eats is fermented or spoiled to some degree. Constantly reeks of alcohol and refuses to drink water unless he must.

Just be neutral.

Do you literally need a badly written system of rules for your character's personality and personal beliefs?

oWoD Vampires had Humanity by default; where you fell on the scale ended up being a good measure of how Good/Evil. However, it also had alternate scales with wildly different definition for what counted as Good (go up the scale) and Evil (go down the scale). DtD7.5E did something similar, so you may want to check that out as well.

Here's something I cooked up a few months back

I'm gonna say he's True Neutral, but I'd like to make it more interesting than "I'm not bothered".

Not really a system, I'm not inclined to keep checking a pamplet to see if it fits in during play. I'd just like a spectrum, brushstrokes. Though having more defined would give it a sense of "this is something people live their lives by", like the Commandments or the Noble Truths or the Pillars of Islam, not the whole Bible.

Woah, that's a cool idea! I guess they consider it "wrong" to be Nurturing when Nature should be taking place?

Good call! I'll go see what I can rustle up. In Vampire it was the Paths of the (whatever), if I remember correctly?

Interesting! So top left is "I love everyone as a group" and bottom right is "I fear each person"? Could you explain your thinking a little more?

>Interesting! So top left is "I love everyone as a group" and bottom right is "I fear each person"? Could you explain your thinking a little more?
Not quite. It is very close to the DnD alignment chart, but limited to a certain aspect of order/chaos and good/evil.
An extreme collectivist will always do what society expects of them; they'll will always be on the side of the majority and "for the greater good".
An extreme individualist will do precisely what their own conscience or experience tell them to do with no regard for what others would think.
An extreme loving person will only act out of love. Not romantic or physical affection, but love for their surroundings. They will help others wherever they can, trust rather than mistrust, give second chances, and always turn the other cheek.
An extreme fearful person will act out of fear of their surroundings. They will only help for personal gain or security, control rather than trust, never give a second chance and make sure nobody can hurt them or take from them.

I can give you some practical examples if you're still interested.

>Woah, that's a cool idea! I guess they consider it "wrong" to be Nurturing when Nature should be taking place?

Yup, got it in one. Because nature must be served, they'll stop anyone from interfering with the "predator gauntlet" newly hatched young must face to gain the "safety" of the water. They'll ignore, and even kill when found inconvenient, any hatchlings or juveniles they come across.

It's only when a juvenile finally develops enough to wander into a Lizardfolk settlement that they're seen as "people" worthy of nurturing and protecting.

>Golden, pissy trees as far as the eye can pee!

Chaotic Neutral
>Follows his own morals and beliefs, even if they do not go with the ones set by people at large, chaotic
>Doesn't do it out of malice, so not evil
>Acts to help only himself and those close to him, so not good
Just work with what's given to you, do what your character would do, not what a charicature of that morality would do. Not all chaotic characters are "lolsorandumb", not all neutral characters are apathetic, not all lawful characters are Judge Dredd

I sure am! Lay 'em on me!

That's rad! I think I will use this! It's also amusing to think what a Lizardfolk would think about other races and babies.
"Do humans really grow to only be this big?"

>That's rad! I think I will use this!

Glad I could be of some small help, user.

>It's also amusing to think what a Lizardfolk would think about other races and babies.

"Think of the children!" isn't going to win arguments with them.

>"Do humans really grow to only be this big?"

The hatchlings start small, just like the sea turtles I mentioned. They then grow physically and develop mentally while living as scavengers. Once a certain point of physical/mental development is reached, they're impelled to search out Lizardmen settlements much like how other animals return to spawning/breeding grounds.

Good point, he'd probably think races with small babies are mighty because they can return to the nest at such a small size!

They'd probably have no real concept of childhood.
The first impression would probably be that the babies were provisions to be eaten later.

>he'd probably think races with small babies are mighty because they can return to the nest at such a small size!

That's a great idea!

I don't usually use morality systems, but when i do, i use MtG's color wheel.

>I sure am! Lay 'em on me!
Well my prime example for a loving collectivist character would be Molly Weasley from the Harry Potter series. She's a family person, welcomes anyone to her home with open arms, is very generous, but also assigns duties to her kids and guests, is worried about the whole wizard community and at one point sends Hermione only a tiny easter egg because of some story in a magazine. This last point shows that the public opinion has great influence on her.

For a loving individualist character, imagine an artist working day and night on their masterpiece with no regular sleep cycle. They are completely motivated by their creative inspiration, not by personal gain and they don't spend a second thinking about what society would tell them to do.

A pure balanced character would be Kvothe, the main character from Name of the Wind. He goes through a lot and does as many things out of fear as out of love. He's a gypsy type of character, so he never fits in with society from the get go, but he always tries his best. He closely follows the rules of his ethnic group and his own moral compass.

Stalin would be a prime example for a fearful collectivist character. He believed he was representing and protecting the masses through his oppressive rule, which was motivated by paranoia and justified fear of political enemies.

For a fearful individualist, think of a ruthless banker, a pickup artist or a misanthropic social recluse. Basically anyone whose prime motivations are fear of competition or of other people in general, personal gain and who doesn't give a damn about other people.

Is the general idea clear to you so far?

Stop casting things in the light of good and evil. Give them cultural nuances that are alien enough to raise eyebrows, but not so fucked up that they make no sense.

Sure is! The examples helped a lot!

>Black/Green
What sort of character would that be?

Yer welcome

A swampy forest character.

I guess that works for a Lizardfolk!
I was just reading about the Swarm and they look pretty cool! I was considering making a Lizardfolk Ranger, but this made me wonder about a Lizardfolk Necromancer, or Grave Cleric...

Sounds smelly

Depending about how the lizardfolf feel about eating carrion, it could be a very important societal role.

Like dogs, they could be labor/guards/food supplies as needed.

B/G is an interesting color pair because it's enemy colors and thus usually represents the duality. In this case duality of life and death and duality of being a part of something but at the same time beyond it.

So it could be
>Survivalist forest ranger, more comfortable with wilderness than with the others
>Fickle witch proficient in deadly curses and life-saving salves
>Ruthless leader of a bandit gang
>Local lord, keeping his subjects safe, but subjecting them to high taxes
>Druid protecting sanctity of both life and death
>Oligarch, flanting his resources and power
>Unstoppable force of nature in an image of a barbarian

What makes MtG wheel realy good is that colors have nuances and there aren't "always good" or "always evil" colors. Even Black has its heroes (they tend to be morally ambiguous, but more often than not they are only ones fit for the job).

(cont.)
So yeah OP, your character's philosophy is definitely G/B. Although point could be made that corpses eventually return to nature, copleting the cycle so as long as nature works nothing is wasted.

>Survivalist forest ranger, more comfortable with wilderness than with the others
'We mourn our lack of innocence, human. Once we were part of the cycle, unaware. But now we know the cycle and so are apart from it. We do not like you, who revel in your self knowledge. "I am" is a curse for creature who defies nature.'