Stevelin7, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by binding and how that relates to the tadpole. I think having it beyond the tadpole is a bit out of left field writing-wise, especially making it a new mechanic, as JandK says. My suggestion was just enhancing use of the Illithid abilities we've already got to allow for a sensible way of turning otherwise rabid evil characters to your side in the long run. Could you explain what you mean by binding?
I see.
but your suggestion the tadpole effects won't be permanent, your have to "concentrate" on the companions, or once the psionic abilities break, the companions will wake up, ...and then your will get hatred from them in return.
does this you want to see?
or a binding system, just extreme powerful as "true name" in the final stage of "neverwinter nights hordes of the underdark". but of course, the price will be much far higher then gold.
a binding will let you get a permanent spiritual connection that don't require your "concentration" in psionic abilities, but require a ritual with heavy price that you have to pay for equal price.
because "The country is easy to change, the nature is difficult to change", a villain can not really change his alignment to other alignment.
That's a really good point, stevelin7. Concentration definitely would be an issue in keeping people loyal to you with the tadpole. At the moment, we have no idea how far Larian intends to take psionic abilities. We need a system that can give valuable evil followers to the party without forcing you to be a servant of the Absolute, unless Larian intends the evil route to involve being subordinate to the Absolute (A bit derivative relative to the God King situation in DOS2, if you ask me. Also, what about prideful evil types?). Will Sazza stay loyal if you remain evil but choose to betray the Absolute? I think not. Same with someone like Minthara, unless you can somehow reveal to all of them that it is a Mindflayer/Netherese/Shadow plot in which they are mere pawns. There needs to be some mechanic that gives you greater customization for evil party composition, along with some mechanic for turning evil NPCs to be loyal to your party specifically, as opposed to slaves of what will probably a major antagonist for the overall plot. I think your binding idea combined with the tadpole is a good way to allow for that.
I do understand JandK's anxiety about it, however. Up until this point, we don't have a full reason to require a binding system. But there is a problem with the evil route Larian is offering, requiring us to join up with easily manipulated cultists interested in mass slaughter. There are other brands of evil! Sometimes evil can manifest in disdain for free will, which is a huge aspect of why the Illithid persuasion operates the way it does in the game. Evil isn't just murderous, or thieving, or cruel, or torturous. We can look back to Immanuel Kant's Metaphysics of Morals, in that goodness is when the rational agent is treated as an end in itself rather than a means. Certainly someone who goes through life solely seeing others as tools and means for their own ends would be a type of evil. David Hume argued that goodness comes from what is useful and what is useful is what is praiseworthy. Someone who is only willing to make themselves useful for their own ends regardless of the needs of others could be a different type of evil. In DOS2,
The God King, Braccus Rex, the Divines, the Shadow Prince, the Sallow Man, Alexander, Dallis, and Adrahmalik all represent different kinds of evil.
and the choices for being evil should be more than, "I'm a mustache-twirling VILLAIN" or "I kill anyone who gets in my way," or, "I just like committing mass murder in exchange for wealth and power." Some villains have ends which they can convince themselves to be virtuous, having chosen dark means to achieve them. There is a content plague for customization, companions, followers, and the evil route, and binding could be a solution.
