Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Tadpoles and consequences

Really? Damn, could've sworn you were. Yet again I stand corrected.


Yes, yes I know, most times I've seen people use the 'want a cookie for that?' expression was to jokingly dismiss someone, and I jokingly answered yes, I want a cookie. I will never say no to cookies!


Fine, yes, but the problem is that those "consequences" are all in my head. It's all mental gymnastics to imagine what my character would act like, what my character would do in a given situation. Not to mention Swen and the marketing team kept on saying that there will be consequences to our actions. In game. Recognized by the game.

See where I am going with this? Imagined consequences are no consequences.

The game doesn't recognize those RP choices for the most part, I can count on the fingers of my hands all the times the game does include very minor dialogue changes. For the most part it plays out exactly the same as a full muncher. When you first get the vision from the Brain where the Prism comes to protect you, the narrator says: THE POWER YOU HAVE USED ON OTHERS. Even if you never picked any illithid dialogue options, happens even if you stayed a true purist and never rescued SH from the pod aboard nautiloid.

The times game recognizes you never used tadpoles:
1. 2nd Guardian Dream.
2. You can honestly tell Jaheira that the tadpole is not changing you and that you are resisting it, after drinking the truth elixir spiked wine.
3. Upon meeting the Emperor you can straight up say no to his Astral Tadpole.
4. When he talks to you about Stelmane (1st dream sequence after the Prism one in act 3) he will make a comment that you should use tadpoles.
5. 2nd dream sequence in act 3, if you annoy him into showing you what had truly happened to Stelmane, he will say that our puerile attitude is annoying him and he will force you to consume tadpoles if he has to.

That's it, no other differences, game plays out as if you had consumed tadpoles.

Meanwhile all the consequence free perks you get for using those powers all the time...


See, that's the problem with this entire situation. The game implies that it's a great sacrifice to use those powers, to munch tadpoles yet... nothing changes (aside from your looks if you take the Astral one).

The entire ending of the game being flawed as it is, but we are finally getting somewhere. You can make the sacrifice yourself, you can pass the responsibility to the Emperor (and essentialy sacrifice the life of a technically innocent githyanki or use said yanki as the sacrificial lamb) or you can let Karlach do it. She volunteers after all. You can essentially get consequence scot-free. Let someone else do it.

Also, in most games, there are always well thought out pathways and loop-holes to get by without sacrificing anyone. I am not saying it should be as easy as resisting tadpoles all the time. That is the problem with BG3, this game gives us so many options and when it comes to those that matter, nah, a binary. Someone becomes a MF or you use Gale to blow the brain.

Take NWN2:MotB - you can save yourself from the curse only if you collect ALL of the mask pieces in your dreams.

Or DA:O's morally grey - sacrifice yourself, Alistair/Loghain or let Morrigan perform her ritual.

And one would think that BG3's sacrifice-free way, loop-holey would be to get Omeluum on the team. Or inspire Orpheus with our actions enough, to the point that he can just psychically bombard the brain, while our mere mortal asses use the stones to command it to off itself.

And yet, no. None of that happens cause "sacrifice is necessary, you saw it coming a mile away". It's all pathos and no logos.

Having the game react more to a non-tadpole run. I personally mentioned something as simple as having a background counter so that the Emperor is more and more antagonistic throughout the game if you continue to reject his advice as an example of what could be done, instead of the current situation where he just memory holes losing his temper or being accused of being shady from cutscene to cutscene.

Is that specific enough?

Because that's the actual topic of the thread. Having options recognized by the game. It's the equivalent of 'BG3 has a difficulty for advanced players, just don't use X, Y Z and run solo.' No. That's not a difficulty provided by the game. The OP not wanting to use tadpoles because their concept of their character wouldn't and not being able to roleplay that choice is not a 'built in consequence' the game supports. That is a deficiency. Because the actual consequence posited by the game is very unhealthy for the brain with a side of possible soul destruction. D&D 5e lore is not flattering to the consequence of ceremorphosis either.

The game doesn't follow through.

Again, I say; I don't think there are consequences to using tadpoles. I don't want to use them because logically there should be consequences to using tadpoles. I'm told this by both the lore of the setting and the game itself. Nothing to do with sacrificing any identity of anything. If the game says 'you feel yourself losing something you will never get back' and literally nothing happens? That has nothing to do with liking the plot or not.

Are you one of BG3's main narrative writers? If not, perhaps insisting on a certain interpretation of what the 'vision' of the story is comes across as problematic. Because as it is, you do not need to use the tadpole for anything for any of the endings. At all. You do not need to consume a single tadpoles in order to be offered the Astral-Touched one. Not a single tadpole power usage is required to defeat the Netherbrain. Karlach can be your mindflayer. Orpheus can magically become a mindflayer too. You can backstab your chosen Mindflayer in the back and magically dominate the Brain for Bhaal/yourself SOMEHOW as well.

So your certainty that the logical ending for not using tadpoles at all is failure seems as equally strange to getting resistance powers.

I disagree, consuming tadpoles are not a sacrifice, game wise you gain powers and your appearance changes, but you still pass for what ever race your avatar is. Neither does the Emperor present it as a sacrifice.

The sacrifice is when the Emperor drops the end game bombshell on you that a mindflayer is required to beat the elder brain. Whether you have consumed tadpoles or not you can choose to make the sacrifice and become a mindflayer or sacrifice another, a party member, or a stranger Orpheus.

Unless Orpheus mindflayer ending plays out differently if you have consumed tadpoles. What sacrifice has the player’s avatar made consuming tadpoles if they command the elder brain to destroy all the tadpoles before destroying the elder brain. Seems to me a no consequence no sacrifice ending to consuming tadpoles.


On my third playthrough and like both my previous playthroughs I have chosen not to consume tadpoles. First playthrough was mainly because Larian said there would be consequence. Subsequently for the same RP reasons I refuse Raphael’s deal, my avatar’s would not trust them and would not take whatever they are offering.

BTW this playthrough my Paladin will be taking the ultimate sacrifice of a mindflayer but up to that point will continue to refuse tadpoles.

You want him to get more and more upset with the character? That's the suggestion? I can't say I like the idea or find it interesting for a mind flayer that's actively trying to manipulate the party, but okay, it's an idea.

I also notice the language used above is asking for *more* reactivity from the game in regards to a non-tadpole run. Meaning you accept that there is, in fact, reactivity. Just not the reactivity you're looking for. This is fair. We all have our complaints. You find me disagreeable because I'm expressive about not being on board with yours.


It is recognized by the game. If you use the tadpoles, the game recognizes that you used the tadpoles and gives you tadpole powers. If you don't use the tadpoles, the game recognizes that by not giving you the tadpole powers.

All of that aside, my biggest concern is that all of the suggestions I'm hearing in this thread would make the game worse, not better. The Emperor is like Crusher if you don't listen to him. He gets MAD! Or you get special powers or resistances for not eating the cake. Or a special ending undermines everything else for the not-quite-pure players who only have the one tadpole.


I have no idea what you're talking about. It's clearly a consequence.

The plot presents a temptation. Do you take the temptation? The game *NEVER* says what the consequence of consuming additional tadpoles will be. The Emperor urges you to do this, but the game *NEVER* insists that you can trust the Emperor. In fact, part of the decision is focused around not knowing the potential consequences. Some of the companions wait to see if anything bad happens to the main character before they agree to consume tadpoles.

As for it being unhealthy for the brain... mind flayers are known for being super geniuses. So if you stick something in my head and it gives me super powers and runs the risk of turning me into a super genius, it's weird to start saying it's "unhealthy" for my brain. The only reason this is even mentioned is because of a picture in a UI interface--which is entirely meta for the player's sake--that gets interpreted as bad. The additional tadpoles aren't actually being inserted into the eye. The essence of the tadpole is being absorbed by the one physical tadpole already in the character's head.


To start, there are clearly consequences. Just not the consequences you're looking for or approve of.

But setting that point aside: why should there be a consequence, exactly?

You feel yourself losing something you'll never get back? Sure, you're evolving, changing, getting super powers. You're the one who wants to interpret that as something... I don't know even know. Heck, your suggestion was to have the Emperor get more mad at you. Is that what you're losing? You'll never get the kindness of the Emperor back? See what I'm saying? None of what you're saying makes sense or adds up or stays consistent. It's just that baked in desire to be rewarded for being special and resisting temptation. You even insist that using tadpoles should have "consequences," because... because! The game says so! Except it doesn't say so. It's just what you want. It's just your vision of right and wrong. Which is fair, to present what you'd like to see in the game. What's not fair is pretending that you're offering some objective truth the rest of us, including the developers, are too dumb to see. Is it even remotely possible that you're the one who doesn't get it?

Anyway, the setting explains that the tadpole is in stasis. If it comes out of stasis, you will turn into a mind flayer. Check. So the setting didn't tell you anything about what consequences there should be.


Oh my goodness. Problematic. Talk about a conversational red flag.

I've made my position abundantly clear. I don't think what you're saying is consistent or makes sense. I understand that you would prefer a different experience in your search for fun. Unfortunately, I can't support your suggestions because I think they would make the game undeniably worse.

I do, however, recognize that there's almost always room for improvement. As such, I'm certainly open to hear any better ideas. There are only two questions:

1. Why should there be consequences, and
2. What exactly should those consequences be?

Keeping in mind that any consequences should actually be well thought out and make sense in the story.

the only things i have ever used tadpoles for are advantages on rolls like Favorable Beginnings or reactions. Luck of the Far Realms is pretty great, as is Psionic Backlash. I just wish that having that nasty wisdom check (you know the one) for turning down more power wasn’t so darn hard.

You: Winning no matter what path you take is a modern failing.
Also You: Why should there be consequences?

Uh huh.

Since you "forgot," I said you hyperfocused on 'purity' powers when there were examples of other ways consequences could be implemented in the thread. You denied ignoring those examples, telling me for a specific example of what I was talking about. I gave you one.

You then proceeded to ignore the context of everything I said in order to pretend that I was arguing that I 'wanted' the Emp to get mad at me for refusing tadpole powers and was upset about it. Said context being: The Emperor was blatantly inconsistent as a character because he has short term amnesia regarding previous conversations. My suggestion was incorporating more reactivity to refusing his urgings to consume more tadpoles, as an EXAMPLE, him getting frustrated with you. And since it is an EXAMPLE, other means of showcasing how the Emp responds to being snubbed repeatedly in a consistent manner are possibilities.

As it is, you can reject him at every single turn and still get offered the super special Astral-touched one. Or you can push him into revealing his abuse of Stellmane and be friendly next time and it's like he never threatened to turn you into a thrall. Hmm, uh, yup, that argument still adds up on the face of it and is consistent.

The main narrative throughline that begins with Act 1's premise of 'tadpole bad, need to cure it' having less reactivity than a side quest being good is certainly a take one can have. I am wondering why said take has consistently refused to respond to 'Larian's pre-launch marketing hyped up choice and consequence of tadpoles' multiple people have mentioned. I have little hope of getting a coherent response.

Ceremorphosis is the process by which an illithid tadpole consumes the host brain, erasing the subject's personality and memory but leaving the physical body alive and under the tadpole control. After this, morphological transformations occur which transforms this body into a new illithid after a week. I posted that before. In this thread. 5e lore on tadpoles has been referenced multiple times.

In this thread.

You: Illithids are super geniuses. A tadpole just gives me powers with a risk of turning me into a super genius. It's weird to say that's unhealthy for my brain! The only reason you say that is because of the UI interface. That's meta. And you are only interpreting a brain getting increasingly fucked up as bad.

Me: ...I have no more questions, your honor. I see clearly now.

Why this isn't going anywhere.

After that little gem, I'm sorry to say that I am now inclined to dismiss any complaints of something 'not making sense' or of inconsistency from you right off the cuff. In fact, I would go as far as to say that if you were to post that Astarion's hair was white, I would be tempted to boot up the game to check.

I see it the other way around. It is using tadpoles that need to have more consequences. You have the positive ones (powers), but there are barely negative consequences to balance it out. From my perspective, the more you use the powers, the more you should want to use them. So past certain tadpole consumption/power use, it should start by changing some dialogues so you can see regular answers but only the "Authority" answer is available to use unless you pass a wisdom save. As in, maybe you have great persuasion and you could have used that, but instead, your proto-illithid brain resorts to power use because that is what an illithid does. And past another point, normal humanoid feelings should start disappearing. Romance makes no sense for illithids unless is to manipulate as the emperor does. And past a certain point, if you have consumed the astral tadpole and many tadpoles, you should crave more tadpoles, illithid brains, and, well, regular brains. Because you are transforming. This means that by the time the emperor tells you that you should turn into an illithid, your character might actually "want" to transform. And resisting that want should be really difficult or even impossible.

Like any other path, the more you walk through it, the more difficult it is to turn back. We see that with Ketheric Thorm. We see it in other characters. Past a certain point, redemption and change become really difficult. Maybe not impossible, but nearly impossible and with a cost. That may very well be to simply die before you are consumed by the illithid personality. Just like the gith prince. That is what was described in early access and what is the threat the characters start with. It makes no sense that suddenly you can turn part of your brain into an illithid but don't change when doing that.

This, I think there could be a cursor on an influence bar where TAV try to keep the tadpole dominated. Consuming or using too much illithid powers in a row would give the tadpole more grip.

First, after opening mind to some tadpoles, additional dialogue choices should be unlocked and then, when the influence of the tadpole is high, the player would be forced to engage in theses lines.
This could lead to breaking a romance, engaging potential allies, obeying specific orders… but it would eventually open new interactions.

As a matter of fact, I think, the companions, that are against using the tadpoles, like Lae'zel, should break up the romance. It doesn't make sense from a storytelling view, that they would ignore that. If you change physically from using the tadpoles, then people should react '('Are you well?' 'What happened to you?'), maybe your charisma based skills go down, and if you use all the unlocks, you indeed should have to face some conseuqences - maybe teh emperor can force you to side with him, so helping Orpheus is not possible anymore. WHich makes sense.
I just find it strange, that you use the tadpoles, your companions at least know, you use the tadpoles and if your face changes, people should be repulsed by it and you have all the illithid stuff inside your head, which I thought was, what made it possible for the emperor to make sure, you are on his side.

I like that a lot. This is beautifully mirroring the Dark Urge dynamic, where you can stay who you are (a murderous puppet of bhaal) or emancipate yourself from that evil influence and find your own way (afaik, haven't played Durge yet), while with the tadpoles you can choose to either stay on track of your own personality and values or give in to the corruption of power and lose your identity / soul.

Like stated many times in this thread before, as of now you can use the tadpole powers because you're power hungry and want to dominate or because you sacrifice yourself as a "true hero" in order to overcome the "netherbrain". It doesn't make a difference in the end: no corruption, no sacrifice. Or as Nicottia perfectly put it:

This would be a perfectly acceptable way to handle this too. And indeed it may be the better way to do it.

If you have options A and B to choose from, you can set up the game to have:

1) A has its rewards, but B also has its (different but equivalent) rewards,

or,

2) A has rewards but also costs, whereas B has neither rewards nor costs,

or,

3) A has both rewards and costs, and B also has (equivalent) rewards and costs.

Here, 3 is what is best game design, but 1 or 2 are also acceptable. But what BG3 has for us is:

4) A has only rewards and no costs, whereas B has no rewards but some costs (namely opportunity costs, i.e. the hidden costs of *not* using the tadpole powers),

where this is absolutely the worst way to design a game.

I would like to have an option to destroy the tadpoles, smash them and step on them - with a satisfying squishy sound.

In my latest play-through, I had the two idiots - I mean Astarion and Gale - who are both very tadpole-curious try one each. I imagined in the aftermath Shadowheart and Lae'zel would bond over calling them out for such stupidity and instantly destroy any further mini squids. I would have loved to actually act this little headcanon out.