And you would still get all of the above mentioned comments (and the picture with a tadpole lodged in your brain which is not something the protagonist would ever see od be acutely aware of if we talk brain looks) whether or not you use the tadpole powers because the whole premise of protagonists story is the tadpole in PCs brain in the first place (used or unused).
Also the danger of ceremorphosis persists with one or more tadpoles used or not (I would however make an exception for the Astral tadpole here which - it is actually made quite clear brings you a few steps closer to becoming a mind flayer)
So...
*shrug*
Yes?
Are you saying that if people are telling you that one tadpole in your brain is bad, that the reasonable conclusion is that introducing more tadpoles that have to eat your brain to make space for them in the first place (we have handy cinematics, that looks healthy!) is a net neutral?
Also, not sure what you mean by the picture of the tadpole not being something the protagonist would see. This is still a video game? The game is still telling you, the player, that tadpoles are bad for your brain regardless of the narrator saying the same thing or not. I don't understand what you are arguing here. And as a game, player, D&D lore nerd AND protagonist, there is 0 indication of the "Astral Tadpole" being the only one that actually matters (for turning ugly) being a thing until it is sprung on you at the very end of the game.
Decisions are made with the information you have, not with the information you don't.
