How do you act when controlling a "Blue and Orange morality" NPC?
For instance, take "old" angels as they were depicted before the humans-with-fluffy-wings meme started to spread. How would something like an Orphanim or Cherubim react to a party of adventurers?
WTF are you talking about retard
They are beyond human comprehension. In D&D, quite a lot of the angel types are also horrifying like that. They'd likely be very judgemental, but still merciful. Their actions, thoughts, and base appearance are simply impossible to conceive, so they can act however you like really. They might attack you out of the blue, to save you from something, or to test you.. or whatever. All kinds of weird shit happened with angelic beings throughout the bible.
Old school Angels are the opposite of orange and blue morality. They're biblical literalists, which is pretty fucking standard.
Saying that, when you're dealing with actual alternate moralities, it's about consistency. Come up with a few clear rules and principles, think through the logic and extrapolate from that. Try and make it make sense in context, so that their actions aren't just random, but based on a strange internal logic.
An NPC in one of my games, for instance, operates on principles of beauty and ugliness rather than good and evil. She loves beauty, and hates ugliness.
To the PC's, she's been a great friend- Their actions are beautiful, heroic deeds worthy of song and story, and they defeat vile, ugly things.
However, her other actions have unnerved them. Such as learning that she has no compunctions about taking someone she finds distasteful and simply rewriting them, remaking their mind and body in a manner more to her taste- In her mind, she's simply destroyed ugliness and created beauty. The defilement of another's free will is of no consequence to her.
It's an interesting tension to the relationship. So far she's been a good enough ally that they don't really want to get on her bad side, but at the same time she does get up to stuff that they often find quite unsettling, despite her fundamental motive being a twisted form of compassion.
They'd probably judge them depending on what the party has done; if they have broke the tenets of their faith or are enemies then expect straight up divine wrath raining on them since OT divine didn't fuck around.
Besides, cherubim and such don't interact with humans; you are thinking of Thrones when referring to fiery wheels. Also, winged humanoids as angels isn't a new meme, from the basic angel to the seraphim they are more or less like that.
In short, educate yourself OP
Black and white=good & evil
Blue and Orange=law & chaos.
"Blue and Orange Morality", aside from being a TV Tropes neologism that makes you look like a twat when you use it in everyday conversation, is really just a license to have characters who behave in nonsensical and incoherent ways.
Want to have a character murder another without a thought? THEIR MORALITY IS BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL
Want to have a character be disgusted by spilled salt? THEY ARE BEYOND COMPREHENSION
It's literally just an excuse to have lolrandumb bullshit without people calling you out for the hack that you are.
>For instance, take "old" angels as they were depicted before the humans-with-fluffy-wings meme started to spread
"Humans with wings" predates Christianity.
I guess it would depend on the situation. Regardless of their divine status angels will still be angels. If a adventure is trying to take something a angel is protecting they will obviously attack then.
Angels have their own reason and some are conected to elements and other skills. You can associate a angel with it's creation. Cherubin have many roles working as guardians some can have diferrent levels of intelligence it depends what you want to do with it and your setting. Because D&D angels are not the same as the ones in the bible.
Poor Icarus.
"Blue and Orange" morality is TVtropes shorthand for a character who is either...
A. So above the concept of normal morality that Good and Evil can't be applied to anything they do.
B. So alien, insane, or just plain le wacky xD that they can't really be called good or evil by normal standards.
Unsurprisingly, few people manage to pull it off without coming across as being stupid.
>neologism
>phrase
Man, you are dumb.
The main point of it is that it looks random while being consistent and coherent.
Just spitballing (and taking from Card)
>The hive people of the wastes have a single great consciousness, that of the hive, and individuals have no value to them. Murder did not even register as a concept before their contact with humanity, and even then, the fact that humans die when killed is something they need to consciously remind themselves.
I could say the samething about a white and black morality system, or a grey one. "Haha this guy's evil so he kills you for no reason." "Oh he's good so he always does the right thing no matter what."
The NPC's beliefs doesn't matter, it's how the GM handles their beliefs that makes a difference.
expanding on your example for fun and to continue to rag on this tard
>they were also unaware of lies and honesty as concepts therefore are suspicious of all humans regardless of how genuine an individual may seem
Angels are a bad example as they're still the physical manifestations of the morality that Abrahamic humanity is founded upon. They look freaky, but they're still rather clear in their intentions.
>the fact that humans die when killed is something they need to consciously remind themselves
The -im suffix implies plurality.
>For instance, take "old" angels as they were depicted before the humans-with-fluffy-wings meme started to spread
You mean the ones that were indistinguishable from (particularly beautiful) humans?
I hate your revisionist history as if cherubim came first.
Angels took on all shapes and sizes because they looked like whatever God needs them to look like. They are not all built in God's image like humans, but some are simply because that's useful.
Oh and their morality is perfectly and purest good, not incomprehensible in the least, not alien in the slightest.
They sing the praises of the Lord, they chant the virtues of heaven, they perform good wherever possible. The light they shine with inspires others to charity, kindness, and noble sacrifice.
They look weird and terrifying (to the point they have to politely console those they frighten), they look awe-inspiring (to the point they have to quietly beg to not be worshiped, as thou shalt put no gods before the Lord), but they are not alien in consciousness.
>thinking the god of the bible is good
By the definitions the bible operates within, God is Good. They cannot be otherwise.
You can debate this by other standards, sure, but if Angels exist then presumably God exists, and without getting into the vastly overplayed 'Hurr God is Evil' thing, those definitions will generally apply.
Plus, while there are specific incidences on the whole (and by the standards of most other deities) Yahweh is pretty alright.
I've always imagined YHWH as a grumpy old grandfather, who has no clue why the children are misintepreting "don't touch the hot stove" to mean "don't paint iron red", touching hot stoves, and blaming their burnt hands on minorities.
If you were there back then, and knew what the fuck was actually said instead of getting information filtered though a dozen sources, it'd all make perfect sense.
Part of it is also the problem with dogmatic adherence to scripture. Rules and principles laid down in a specific context, and generally reasonable within that context, sustained long after the context that created them no longer exists, either becoming a useless appendix or being reinterpreted in ways that were never intended.
You can see a very similar process with the US Constitution, although in less severe ways and over a shorter period of time.