It does bother me that the most of an explanation we have given is from Omelum, and that is contradicted by how we see the parasites work with the True Souls we meet-the Parasite leaves the body when the host is killed, and can indeed be separated from the host physically. Considering we have a scroll of True Resurrection available and the ability for our characters to die in-game, it's kinda weird that we don't get party members pointing out how our parasite didn't leave our skull when, if for example asterion drains you in his reveal cutscene. Considering how casually the game treats death and resurrection both in gameplay terms and plotwise (asterion's reaction to you coming back from that incident is to basically brush it off, and several companions have special dialogue now in case you kill and resurrect them prior to having them join you)
There isn't really much of a barrier between gameplay death and story death in BGIII. Your characters are *actually* dead when they go down like that, not abstracted as being 'knocked out' in other games, and there's multiple dialogues acknowledging this and an entire sidequest (withers the lich) devoted to giving you easy access to resurrection.
I mean, hell, Gale has to actually die to even get the scroll in the first place. You'd think the skull+hammer+resurrection solution would bear some greater in-game discussion.
But why were the acolytes of True Soul Edowyn ordered to kill everyone, including true souls, that escaped from the crashed ship ?
Doesn't that mean that there was something special going on in this ship, which was menacing to the absolute. Different tadpoles.
