Not necessarily. It depends on the build and the character's stats.
No it doesn't... not in the situations that matter. I'm not talking about using the hot bar combat powers - which you only get after using the tadpole and experiencing the violating dreams; the uses that you need to take to get to that point never allow you to do anything or resolve anything non-violently that you cannot also do just as effectively another way, without using it. There is no tadpole dialogue option in the game that averts conflict and is the only way to do so - another option (usually options, plural) always exists that achieves the same end without it.
This statement:
There are a number of situations where using them avoids bloodshed and not using them results in death.
Is just not true, I'm afraid. There is no such situation - not that I'm aware of at any rate. What one are you thinking of?
The game allows people to use charms, read thoughts, and otherwise incapacitate people with spells that deprive them of the ability to move, influence them and cause physical and mental torture, madness, and other spells which are invasive to the mind and cause fear and panic. I don’t see the difference between using tadpole powers, or magic with similar results, except that we are more accustomed to spells being more acceptable, but they have the potential to be invasive too.
It's true to a certain extent, and it's a topic discussed every now and then at game tables as well; the main difference here is that using manipulative, compelling or restricting magic in self defence, in defence of one's life, or in the heat of combat is one thing - using compulsion to take away a person's free will actively, because it was easier than resolving the conversation or diffusing the situation some other way, is quite different.
The game, by virtue of being a video game and not an actual live person, is not equipped to handle all the nuance of character decision and motivation - it can't really ask you why you're making a particular choice, and the 'why' is often more important than the 'what' when talking about personal alignment - so realistically, the simplest answer we have to fall back to is that mentally dominating other sentient beings and compelling their free will is, in general principle, an evil act.
