Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Finally able to articulate one of the biggest flaws with the main story/writing

...apart from them falling apart (pun intended) in Act 2, that is.

It's the inability to stick to the theme it's trying to embody, and even downright contradicting it.

At least in EA and from what can be seen with the companions in the main game, it can be argued that the throughline the game was probably intended or at least attempted to go with were it not watered down in the end is the loss of self and the fear of that happening. The idea that you are a host to something that will, if untreated, erase you as a person and remove you from existence while your body continues on, now hosting a cosmic aberration. At least that is what the Early Access Daisy interactions and the comments by the companions on their illithid powers, together with the implications that using tadpoles "takes something from you that you'll never get back" have been implying.

As for the companions, we have:

- Lae'zel whose entire worldview crumbles as she discovers the truth about her people (combined with the tadpole),
- Shadowheart whose past has been forcefully erased and whose whole persona is an implanted lie (combined with the tadpole),
- Gale whose pursuit of Mystra and magical omnipotence turned him into a walking disaster waiting to happen (combined with the tadpole),
- Wyll who took a pact which turned him into an exile from his own city and family (honestly, his plot was framed a lot better in the EA, what with him actually having a lot more meaningful conflict with Mizora seemingly, and yes, combined with the tadpole),
- Karlach, turned into a living weapon and forced to fight for her archdevil mistress (combined with the tadpole),
- Astarion, effectively enslaved for two centuries and his live self all but dead (combined with the tadpole),
- Minthara, whose memories were deliberately suppressed so that she follows Orin's and the Absolute's commands without question (combined with the tadpole),
- ...and Jaheira, Halsin, and Minsc, mostly for fanservice. Ahem.

The problem arises with the whole "combined with the tadpole" aspect of it. Instead of it being a threat and a risk to use and something to remove at all costs, it's ultimately presented as... a source of cool superpowers. Rather than have the characters either hang on to what they know they are and maintain every last aspect of their selves - or give up and allow their being to be overwritten by the combination of a tadpole and Netherese magic, they instead have a single rough night and any threat from the tadpole is otherwise neglected. And then comes the Emperor, who basically represents the contradiction in the flesh:

- No, apparently becoming an illithid isn't an irreversible erasure of a person who was the host for the tadpole, despite the game itself mentioning that very fact at several points (Lae'zel and Withers come to mind right away). You get even more cool superpowers!

- No, you don't cease to exist as soon as you transform, if you have a "strong personality(tm)", you get to keep your memories and your self, now with a "superior(tm)" physical form to boot!

- No, why would you shun becoming a mind flayer, never mind the fact that you will have to conceal yourself if you hope to interact with the surface society in any way and sustain yourself on brains (obviously ethically harvested from "criminals", forget about what makes the criminal in the first place) while no longer having neither your mind (no matter what the Emperor says) nor your body!

- Apparently tadpoled people can just change at the drop of the hat by really wanting to, and even non-tadpoled ones (Orpheus), even though the process was supposedly suppressed! Hell, the plot point about "only a mind flayer can counter the Netherbrain" would have worked so much better if the game actually presented becoming a mind flayer as a genuine horrible outcome and clearly displayed your character no longer being themselves when they do transform, being an actual sacrifice for the greater good that you either make, or let the Emperor manipulate you to the bitter end. Or make unwillingly transforming an actual risk and an actual threat when facing the Netherbrain, having the "strong personality(tm)" be a way to offset changing in the first place, either through power or through all the bonds you are allegedly building with your companions throughout the game. Have Daisy back and make his/her pull (and through it, the Netherbrain's) ever stronger the more you succumbed to the tadpole, offsetting the powers you got with having to reap the consequences of abusing them... but also giving you a way to actually overpower the leash if you well and truly commited to being an illithid hybrid or something.

This risks turning into a rant more and more with each sentence, so I'll stop here, but I am curious as to what others think regarding this point and what their ideas for fixing the plot might be.

This reads like a sound analysis. But I fear 'fixing the plot' is out of the question at this point. What should be possible is for Larian to learn from their mistakes, for their next games. They should make damn sure that they have a good backbone for the story in place, next time. It should be good enough to withstand and enable all story branches that are added, changed and removed later on.

Nothing will change in their next game with all the simps praising BG3. What BG3 has shown is that you do not need a good story for RPGs. Just pack waifus and genital customizations in and you are done.

Don't forget bestiality. What a world we live in today!

While I agree with your conclusion at many levels I think it is a bit harsh. BG3 has a decent story, the base premise is actually kind of interesting, The issue is they abandon that base premise by the end of act one. This is a lesson they should take to heart going forward, stay with the plot. Throwing curves is all well and good but outright ignoring or abandoning the basic premise of the story is not a plot twist, it is just bad writing.

BG3 did get me back to my first love in computer gaming, RPGs. Not the new single character first/third person crap, but the group dynamic deeper game. This has been wonderful for me to enjoy but has really shown the flaws of BG3 glaringly to me. Right now I am knee deep into Kingmaker. BG3 wins on pure polish no doubt. However when directly compared to Kingmaker I feel like BG3 is a mile wide and 1" deep. So much effort was put into "relationships" that the story feels like it suffered for it. While Kingmaker might not have the romancing of BG3 I still find myself invested in some companions. Linzi is the little sister always following you around, getting in the way and yet you love her dearly. Valerie is a steadfast friend that you know will ALWAYS have your back, so you make sure you always have hers. Tristian is the eternal optimist that annoys as much as he uplifts you. Just looking at those three you might not see any sex interests but you already see way more depth of relationships.

Larian, it appears with hindsight, took the easy way out for this. They made use of the Baldur's Gate name and used the existing successful game mechanics and then crafted around those things. Instead of delving deep on the main storyline they use distractions with relationships (sexual not deeply meaningful) to try and gloss over the story inconsistencies.

Even thought I am going hard at them, I think Larian crafted a solid game. Was it worth of GOTY awards, well look at what it had to go against. Let's face it they did not have stiff competition this year. Starfield and Diablo both FLOPPED. In context of this year I think yes they deserved the awards they go.

My hope and prayer however is that Larian is self aware enough to know they can and should do better. That they can move forward and take this attention and yes cash to craft better. My concern is that you, Ixal, have summed up the lesson Larian and others will take from this and we will see our beloved genre damaged as others pile on the easy street bandwagon to create tripe.

No imo its not harsh. I do not look at the basic premise but at the final, complete product and it is lacking. Especially as story and writing are the most important components of an rpg.
And I do not think BG3 is solid either with the bugs, the unfinished act 3 and the cumbersome mechanics and imo should not have gotten GOTY awards.

I agree with a large majority with what you have said, however I would argue that while the tadpoles potentially represented much more of a threat in EA, due to the nature of being unable to see the outcomes of our actions past Act 1, I can�t really agree that that was compelling evidence to support the tadpoles overall as a better narrative device back then simply because we had no clue where the plot was going (and likely never will). I feel that it was equally flawed in part because Daisy had just about as many problems as the Emperor, but simply in a different vein.

Did it feel more compelling? Perhaps, but I think that was simply because we don�t know what would have happened. It did feel a lot darker and more foreboding in regards to a loss of self, but again, not knowing the outcome of the story overall allows us to speculate to heights that would have still likely been unachievable. Obviously I�m not saying what we got in the end over EA was an improvement in this specific regard, merely that we can only really speculate with what we did get and cherry pick the potential that EA represented.

Also, and I could be reading the plot and writing entirely wrong (my memory is a little fuzzy due to losing a large majority of my save files by accident), so feel free to correct, but isn�t it suggested or outright mentioned that Mindflayer Tav is merely a facsimile of the original? Isn�t it just a copy that happens to have their memories? I guess that�s another argument of whether someone really is still themselves after such a transformation, but still.

I agree with @Ixal, and certainly also the OP's analysis. Not only is BG3 such a poorly made game, but even worse is that Larian will not improve/change it's game-designing ways ever now because of all the utterly un-analytical accolades heaped upon them by a sycophant gaming news media. The lesson from BG3 is: 40% pretty cinematics, 40% gratuitous sex and nudity, 20% everything else. This is the game-making formula that sells. But I remain hopeful that at least some of the more serious RPG makers will decline to follow this model, even if that means making RPGs that sell to only a smaller (and more discerning) audience.

Not necessarily. I would argue that the core of a RPG is role playing, as it says on the box. In my opinion, immersive world building and character building are the most important elements. In theory, an RPG could do without an overarching story, if it weren't for the game needing to end at some point. I greatly enjoyed some of the Fallout games, just because of the superb world building. I remember roaming about and shooting things, but I don't remember much of the overall story arc.

That said, if there is to be an overall story arc, it is the developer's duty to do it well.

Look, we got bear sex, brothels and the horniest companions Faer�n has to offer -- what else do you want?!? /s

Kidding aside, I appreciate the analysis of these posts. I disliked the Illithid/Tadpole plot from my very first play, but I couldn't quite explain why; I just hated it. Threads like this actually help illuminate where some of the problem areas can arise.


It seems like this goes along with the random shifts in tone as well. Is this a fantasy story? Science Fiction? Comedy? Cartoon? BG3 never made up its mind. You can mix these elements, certainly, but if there is no core 'feel' or theme to anchor the proceedings, then you end up with a junk drawer of misaligned plot moments that won't feel as meaningful or coherent as they could.

Forty percent sex and nudity? Really? I would estimate the time spent on sex in my playthroughs at a few minutes. Less than one percent. And that small time happened to be nature calling, so not gratuitous at all.
The amount of nudity � well that can vary. It is possible to have a high percentage of that, if you choose to display camp clothes and then remove the camp clothes. But that is up to the player.

Agreed. I think @Brainer's analysis is a good one but I feel uncomfortable when the conversation shifts into sex negative territory. I liked the romances - indeed I think the romances are the reason to play the game the main plot just is deeply flawed. And yes, I even liked that you could modify genitals. I mean my toon hasn't bathed in a month why would she take time to shave her nethers?

The sex is not to blame for the problems in the end game.


I fear you may be right but some small part of me hopes for a definitive edition or a director's cut.

Another optimistic part of me hopes that other companies will the real lesson BG3 - if you pack it with content, if you deliver everything but the kitchen sink fans will forgive anything. Even the deeply flawed "Orpheus is free" moment.

And, yes, if I'm being honest I never liked the whole mind flayer hook because I came to the game with prejudices from table top. I played lots and lots 2e and a little 3.0 and I never liked that that one type of save or suck monster needed expensive supplements to play properly and that they had powers that couldn't be countered by spells. And I just don't like body horror - extracting US makes me sick to my stomach.

I remember when I first saw trailers for this game and saw mindflayers involved, one of my thoughts was "A Baldur's Gate game is going to focus on the illithid? That feels... strange. What about the Bhaalspawn plot?" and that feeling definitely came back big time in Act 3.

During the early game (early Act 1), I was actually starting to get into the illithid plot. Having only met Shadowheart and Lae'zel, both of whom had personal objectives closely tied to the illithid and the strange artifact related to them, on top of the shared goal of getting un-infected, it felt like maybe this game did actually have a focus, and the BG brand was just going to be about this being a new threat to the city and familiar locations, not a continued storyline. I even liked the way the party's attempt to seek out a healer for their own problems led to tripping over the tension of the Emerald Grove, which itself turned out to partly be because the cult of the unknowingly infected were being drawn to nearby ruins. Back at this stage of the game, I was genuinely very into it. (For one thing, the fact that our characters, thinking they were of sound mind, were going to head to the exact same place as the clearly-influenced cultists, was what I thought would be a nice little touch of ambiguity about how "in control" our characters really were).

But then... cracks started forming. All of the companions being double-cursed in various ways (Astarion is a vampire, Gale has his orb, Karlach has her engine, Wyll has a pact) seemed a little... distracting. Not too much, maybe, but aside from Lae'zel and initially Shadowheart, I had a big feeling of "Wait, but how did this bring you on a collision course with the tadpole plot?" Silly me, I guess -- I thought each of these characters had a reason to already be seeking out the illithid, or the same ruins as the cult, etc., and had happened to get captured in the process. But I did enjoy most of the companions, so it if their connection to the main plot was a little tenuous... fine. Honestly, I sometimes feel like being too focused can make a story feel tiring, so having some elements designed to add variety and make the world feel a bit larger than just the main plot isn't the worst thing (It still didn't feel like the right way to set it up, but not everything has to be perfect).

Once the plot involving the Dead Three came into play, though... It honestly just feels like a mess. Suddenly the Absolute doesn't feel like the grand villain they were made out to be, but we have so little time invested into setting up the Dead Three that they don't, either -- -especially since the final boss fight is against the brain, and the two Chosen in Act 3 are sort of just like side plots you have to work through to get to the brain... And then Orpheus was maybe supposed to be a big deal, but I mainly just associate him with a single companion (Lae'zel)?

I still enjoyed the game, but the longer it went on, the more it shifted from "Actually invested in the main story" to a bit more of "bag of little substories, some of which I greatly enjoy and some where I just kinda shrugged and moved on."

Using tadpoles / becoming a mind flayer is strongly advertised by the story but contradicts role playing: you build up a character just to erase it again later. This is a very risky approach for a RPG and you'd need a strong story to hold this together.

Yeah, I'm very much the same. It's amazing how this game manages to succeed with me in spite of the main plot and the various other elements I really dislike. (Haven't gone near Us since that first terrible experience in Early Access...)

The Absolute is more interesting than the Dead Three.

I maintain that the biggest issue in Act III is that the feeling and mood falls away. The city, while great in a lot of ways, doesn't manage to come alive in a cultural sense.

But that said, the game does seem to lose something once you're confronted with the truth about the Absolute. I almost wish the Dead Three were the pawns, were the ones who had been initially tadpoled and were now being controlled.

I would posit that anyone who has ever had an animal infected by parasites will be automatically turned off by the use of any tadpoles. I've also had the misfortune of being infected with parasites myself in the past. It is nothing but a disgusting business.

I will always play through as not wanting to touch those things with a ten foot pole. (I even kill the one running away from of Edowin's body.)

When I found out about the game in EA I wrote it off completely once I saw the cinematic. I'm only here becaue the game was gifted to me and yes, I am still enjoying it. But yeah, the illithid storyline was incredibly risky and it needed a very skillful writing team to pull off. I do not feel that Larian has this team. My hope is that they will in the future and that the success of BG3 does not make them lazy.

People do know there are more gaming companies on this planet than just Blizzard, Bethesda and Larian, right? Because I keep seeing this and it always looks like a very, very weird thing to say with a straight face. Octopath Traveler 2, Spiderman 2, Alan Wake 2, RE4R, Dead Space R, Hi-Fi Rush, the list goes on. 2023 has been a record year for the most top rated games in twenty years: https://www.axios.com/2023/10/31/2023-best-reviewed-games. The main difference is the same reason why I shrug and give the lion's share of the 'blame' for GOTY on IGN who created the 'underdog showing AAA how it's done' story out of thin air with misleading and at times falsified reporting, which is one of if not the biggest reason the game got the attention it did.

Thread tax: Yes, but also no and also kind of. Multiple themes, switching themes, transforming or subverting themes are not in and of themselves hallmarks of poor writing. It takes time and has to be set up. As with most things, it's not the premise, it's the execution. Sticking to a theme still won't help cut corners, lazily written outs, retcons or plot holes. It's the symptom of the disease, and the disease is everything regarding the main plot was not planned out very well. What you are describing is 'set up with no payoff' paired with 'attempting to pay off on zero set up.'

Establishing the rules the setting runs on, or on having some kind of authoritative knowledge fails because the game doesn't know what rules its running on. The mindlfayer question, does it erase you or not? Setting up logical through lines fails because the story feels like it was written by the seat of someone's used underwear. You can't follow your progress on a map, who did what when is confused, why doesn't X know Y person, why didn't Z do F, etc because no one was interested in building a *world.* It's all handwaved at whim, often defaulting to Rule of Cool to get out of hard questions. Which leaves the pay off falling flat with the slightest bit of critical thinking. It's not a theme problem, the story as a whole is not *coherent* which is much bigger, imo.

Let's not forget System Shock Remake which every big outlet seems to have forgotten about the existence of...


It's not that, it's specifically that the game seems (seemed) to have an idea behind the plot but it's not even subverted but outright flushed down the toilet because they couldn't bother with how they've handled the Emperor and the tadpole powers. A really sloppy mechanical implementation has managed to heavily cripple the plot, or vice versa. It's like if the whole spirit hunger mechanic from NWN2: MotB was just a source of flashy abilities and not a terrible curse that would irreversibly corrupt the PC if they gave in to it.

To add: there is a fundamental problem regardless of the sauce it's under, and it's that the tadpoles as an issue are completely divorced from the companions' storylines and really the entire plot outside of moments it remembers that they exist. We have plots like, again, NWN2: MotB where every character embodied some aspect of what it was about (dreams, mechanics of souls, spirits and their way of existence, faith or lack thereof...), and Torment, and, hell, even Larian's own previous game to some extent.

In EA every companion's dream person was allegedly deeply tied to them and their insecurities, weaknesses, and hidden desires (for a custom PC those amounted to power and hanky-panky, with any hopes that it gets in any way developed dying together with Daisy). Lae'zel's was Vlaakith, Shadowheart's was her old (boy)friend (who in the main game seems to have been turned into Nocturne...?), Gale's was Mystra and so on. Given the premise of the "loss of self" and everyone having a moment where they are inches away from their worldview or their grasp on themselves falling apart, wouldn't it have made perfect sense for said desires and weaknesses to be used as a way for the tadpole/Absolute to try to sway them over? Lae'zel could become the ultimate warrior of her people, Shadowheart could get revenge on Shar's cult and Shar herself... Cue having to convince them otherwise or watch them succumb, and it resulting in a split of loyalties down the line when the time comes to pick the side.

As for the lack of planning, it's hardly the first time in the past 10 or so years that Larian seem to rewrite their games almost from the ground up rather late into development. Dragon Commander was supposed to be a sequel to Flames of Vengeance originally, and its final form suffered from a lot of cuts and awkwardly stitching together what was there (the final act and the endings were VERY underwhelming and underdeveloped). D:OS1 was meant to be about the origins of the Black Ring and Zandalor (and, I assume, delving into the mage wars described in the older games' lore) before effectively becoming the reboot for the setting and turning into Source this, Void that. The second game's Eternals were orignally the Raanaar from Beyond Divinity according to some concept art, and Damian was likely intended to be the disguised antagonist, actually making it a direct tie-in between BD and Divinity 2 instead of being half that and half a direct sequel to D:OS1. Despite all that, I loved all three of those (Dragon Commander too, despite its shortcomings), but BG3 teeters on the edge of being the equivalent of DA: Inquisition for me as far as the studio's one overhyped but ultimately underdelivering outing goes.

BG3's just the latest in the line, and I imagine decentralized writing didn't help matters much. Before Larian's writing could be hammy and awkward, but at least it was genuine and didn't take itself too seriously. It had a Pratchett-esque quality to it with an overall humorous setting with an occassional heavy theme (albeit handled with a lot less finesse and depth than Pratchett). BG3 is a mess that is now being retroactively explained as allegorical / "always intended as such", with headscratchers like Halsin making it all seem like a melting pot which nobody really cared to bring up to a standard of some kind.

The percentages are meant to represent the importance of these things to most players out there, not necessarily you or anyone specifically in this forum. I'm talking about the 99.99% of BG3 players *not* here in this forum.

This made me chuckle.

I am one of these people for whom the line between a masterwork and a good game is coherence and having something to say... so I have to agree that this bothered me. Massively. To this date.

This was fascinating to me as someone who didn't touch EA. I think that might go a long way to explain what I'm feeling with the companions in the full release, which is that they do seem to have a lot of thematic parallels (having curses, having complicated relationships with gods/masters, etc) that the story just... didn't actually make the connection between? Or made it feel like a weird coincidence, rather than something the Absolute might actively have been looking for. Knowing that each person would originally see a different visitor in their dreams and that this was going to be a more direct comparison between the companions does make some sense, although I do think it would probably feel a bit too contrived if they went with that. The uh... setup for Daisy on that is something I am definitely glad to have skipped, even if Dream Visitor is rather bland.

The thing that really frustrates me at times is that after Lae'zel and Shadowheart, they seemed to have completely given up on the companions having any actual reason to have come into contact with the main story, aside from being randomly abducted by the illithid.

For example, Gale is an experienced wizard who's been cursed by Netherese magic, which he's spent the last year studying. The Absolute, meanwhile, is affected by Netherese magic. This feels ripe for a setup where Gale sensed that the cult of the Absolute (even if he did not know them by name) was touched by Netherese magic and came to the area to investigate -- in a heroic interpretation, he came here knowing how dangerous this was and saw it as his duty to intervene, despite being weakened. In a more selfish interpretation, he came here hoping that these fellow scholars of Netherese magic might hold the key to curing him. It may not be obvious that this is connected to the tadpoles at first, but it'll hit around Act 2.

Wyll and Karlach both have ties to the hells and devils in their history, and the interests of devils seem to be hovering around the periphery here -- Zariel previously made a deal with Gortash. Mizora saw fit to investigate the cult herself. Raphael is monitoring the situation and looking for opportunities. Personally, I feel like having Zariel/Mizora grant their blessing to the heroes' quest to destroy the brain was a bit too... convenient. First of all, Zariel worked with Gortash in the past. Was she blind to this? And second, surely there's some way they could be trying to exploit the situation, even if they want the Absolute defeated in the end (Raphael gets closer to this). It seems like there was room for the devil's involvement and their opinions on the upstart "god" of the Absolute to be more developed, and it could have provided a very interesting perspective on everything the Absolute is doing, especially if the Absolute was basically viewed as a rival for gobbling up souls after luring them in with devil-like means.

Both of these seem like opportunities to have these characters start out thinking they were pursuing unrelated plots and happened to get tadpoled along the way, only for it to turn out that they were all investigating different branches of the larger conflict.

Another little nugget stuck in my mind was that, if the Absolute can do things like protect a vampire from the sun, it seems like that could be a marketing pitch for the cult -- join the Absolute, and be cured of curses, disease, infirmities, etc, and the Absolute helps those that the gods have turned their backs on. I probably wouldn't have made Astarion knowingly approach the cult (perhaps they approached him with the pitch / kidnapped him to test the effects of the tadpoles), for multiple reasons, but it just seemed like this was used as a throwaway excuse for why Astarion mechanically works like any other character, when it could have been woven into the narrative of the Absolute's doctrine.

Thanks for saying this! It's good to know I'm not the only one. I also can't complete a Durge run for similar reasons. The body horror after the party made think something like "this is too much, do people really enjoy this"?

I haven't even touched Durge, I've heard enough to know it is definitely not the path for me!

You can play as a good/resisting Durge, and in terms of your actions it�s not that much different from a good Tav. Except for like two or three involuntary things. Otherwise, you always have a choice. Even with the involuntary things, you do often have a choice over how it plays out. (For example, you may have heard that the Durge kicks a squirrel to kill it. Well, if you talk to the squirrel with the �speak with animals� skill activated, that doesn�t happen at all. So still, choice.) And I love it, I think it adds so much to the game for the player character to have an investment in unraveling the plot just as much as the companions do. I highly recommend it, even if it�s just once.

Those are exactly the problem. Along with the gore/body horror stuff.

One thing I dislike about the game is how Withers and a lot of other sources claim that Illithads have no souls.

But, that is not true. There are multiple sources from actual DnD monster manuals that state that Illithads and mindflayers do have souls.


It kinda feels like they were trying to have their cake and eat it to. Like, do you keep your soul and personality, like with the emperor, or do you just become a mindless thrall?


Also, I made an entire thread about how if you stop and think about it for 2 seconds, The Emperor and Orpheus could have sorted things out diplomatically because both sides need each other to beat the greater threat, and both sides are reasonable, up until the point where you are forced to choose between them with no way to alter or make them trust each other or anything.

One other big peeve I have is that none of the characters in act 3 think to say : "Hey, I know another mindflayer that works for the society of science. His name is Omeluum, he is a really chilled squid, why don't we go grab him, and not have to force someone to turn into a mind flayer?"

Wanting to have their cake and eat it too is a good summary of how a lot of the illithid plot ends up feeling.

I was leery of Withers' comment about illithid souls but didn't have the lore background to really question it. And ultimately, it seems like a pointless departure from the established lore, since it didn't have much bearing on the plot.

As for the illithid keeping their personality... I feel there was room to explore this idea, but it just wasn't handled very well, especially for the protag. For one thing, "mindless thrall" vs "individual identity" is already established as having to do with whether you can block out the elder brain (Omeluum seems like the more traditional version; no association with his pre-illithid self, but also acting independently from any elder brain). As for how much a mind flayer keeps their old "self," I can accept that there are "outliers," like the Emperor, who may retain more of their old memories and personality than the typical illithid. But I would have preferred it if there were some concrete factors that contributed -- for example, if the Emperor was rescued from the mindflayers right after being infected, and thus was not exposed to the elder brain early on. If he transformed in the care of his friends and was essentially forced to cooperate with them / to interact with people who kept treating him like his old self, perhaps that would result in a mindflayer that still retains much of his old identity, even if his personality has undergone significant changes. The idea that he could be kept flying under the elder brain's radar for years on end, just waiting for the chance to break free, seems a little odd. But at the same time, I believe that's also how the ulitharids work -- they gain independence because they are meant to break off from the colony and become new elder brains themselves. I originally thought the Emperor might have been one of these, but the game didn't go that way, either.

For me, one of the biggest "have their cake and eat it too" bits was actually the sex scene with the Emperor. For so much of the game, it's made to seem like the mind flayers are relatively cold and passionless (the Emperor himself is no exception, as seen whenever he remarks on the protag being "sentimental"), and in-game texts allude to the fact that mind flayers may not even their sexual organs anymore (not to mention that not being how they reproduce). It was unbelievably jarring to then have the Emperor not merely flirt with the protag, not merely indulge or exploit any sexual fantasies the protag may have about them, but to be presented as actually having a sex drive of his own, aimed at the protag. I could see many slight alterations to this scene that would have felt more consistent with the rest of what we see -- either for it to have to be player-initiated and the Emperor humoring them, or for it to clearly be more of an act of manipulation (cut back on the part about his own emotions being telepathically communicated, and leaning more into there being some ulterior motives present). I acknowledge that the game doesn't remark on the, uh, mechanics of how this scene played out, but regardless of whether those technically make sense, the Emperor's attitude towards the encounter felt incredibly off.

I can understand that, by the time finding a mind flayer ally is necessary, it would probably be too hard to track down Omeluum in the chaos of the battle and get him over to the brain. Though, I do feel like it's weird how little the game acknowledges his existence when discussing the nature of mind flayers. Like, the fact that the Emperor expected my character to be hostile towards him purely on the basis of being a mind flayer, when she had met Omeluum in the Underdark and was perfectly friendly with him... I feel like he should have potentially been more of a source for some interesting discussions about the lore and implications of what was going on with the Absolute, even if he wasn't really the type to get involved when a major battle comes.

The Guardian is more than "rather bland", he's the blandest flavour of recycled cardboard there is (the first few scenes feel like practically a word-by-word retread of D:OS2's gods), complete with patronizing and almost seemingly mocking the player directly with all the combat comments.

As for not being there for EA, eh, not much was missed in the grand scheme of things, because the EA players seem to have become an irrelevant minority compared to the ridiculous influx of fresh blood drawn in by the outlets praising the oh-so-defiant-and-creative (don't forget "inclusive" and "standard-setting") underdog and *that* Halsin's scene which is kind of very tasteless in hindsight given Astarion's backstory. If the EA feedback really mattered in the end, we wouldn't have had the sudden switch to the Emperor (time and again people refer to how it's still Daisy in the artbook), the removal of racial ability bonuses, the grove battle still taking place in broad daylight for no reason whatsoever, and numerous other oversights and dumbing-downs.

I suppose that I just feel like everything I've heard about Daisy (but have not experienced firsthand) makes the interactions sound off-putting, even if the Dream Visitor being the Absolute felt like the more natural conclusion. I looked up some clips of EA Dream Visitor just to confirm, and it feels just a little too much like having a sexual predator breathing down your neck. At least, when I pick up a D&D game pitching the sort of "make your own character" heroic fantasy vibe, I'm looking for a more empowering mood, and the clips I saw impose such a feeling of helplessness and disempowerment on the player character. Not that there's inherently anything wrong with that kind of story, but it's certainly not what I think of when I think of playing D&D.

That's probably what you meant when you talked about not committing to a theme and vision, but it seems like they were probably caught between a target tone for the story and may have accidentally picked some plot devices that tread into territory that clashed with the vibe they thought they would have.

I do wish the Dream Visitor had more of a personality and just... more interesting conversations in general.

Personally, if I were trying to figure out how to pull it off, I'd probably go one of two directions:

1) If the Dream Visitor is the Absolute, then I'd play up the Dead Three as the main enemies that the characters are trying to fight from the get-go, with the tadpole situation feeling like an impediment. Then, I'd have the Dream Visitor largely trying to give advice or commentary related to how to fight the Dead Three, leaning towards "Wouldn't more power be more helpful?" and "There might be a way to use these tadpoles to your advantage against the Dead Three." Less pushy and invasive overall, taking some of the "patient mentor" vibes given to the current Dream Visitor -- but with none of that "I have to go! There's a battle going on behind me!" nonsense. Just a very calm, aloof presence, much more like a deity or devil who is ultimately unconcerned with whether any individual mortal falls for their temptations. Ideally, I think the Absolute should be able to present specific, viable paths to achieving certain objectives that would otherwise be difficult or require other sacrifices, rather than just offering vague promises of power / combat spells that aren't actually necessary to win any given fight. Prior to a final boss fight with the Dead Three (or whatever Chosen / minions they put on the field), the player will first confront the Absolute and either accept their power or free themselves from it.

2) If the Dream Visitor is "the Emperor," then first of all, I'd nix the Balduran nonsense and go with the story that the Emperor was previously "just another adventurer." Rather than the fight taking place behind them in the dreams being against Orpheus, I'd probably make it a dreamscape battle with the Absolute. Their reason for encouraging the player to embrace their tadpole powers is because one needs illithid powers in order to participate in this mental battle with the hivemind, and they are trying to train the player character to assist them, with there being some hidden catch that comes into play later -- for example, if the astral prism is "powered by having a captive mind flayer," then the Emperor will be planning to swap places with the player, escaping as soon as a replacement that can still protect them from the Absolute is found. Or perhaps they simply misled the party about their intentions and were always seeking to dominate the Absolute, but they needed to free up some mental capacity to devote to that effort. Alternatively, if the Emperor truly does have goals that align with the party's and plans to act in good faith, then I think there should just be a reason why the party itself is more of a threat to the Emperor. For example, if the Emperors need the party's assistance in the dream world, and if the Emperor is vulnerable during these visits (instead of that "just testing you" nonsense if you attack them), then it might make sense why an illithid would disguise themselves in order to avoid potentially being attacked while vulnerable. The struggle here is that, if the party does kill the Emperor, they'd lose their protector, but I think that could be reworked so it instead means that party has more direct "battles" with the Absolute -- for example, if the Emperor is gone, then on every long rest (after the health/spells are recovered but before the next day begins), the party gets pulled into a combat encounter with the Absolute in their dreams, forcing them to take damage and expend resources at the start of every day. This can represent the mental toll of struggling against the elder brain, a struggle that the astral prism makes possible, not easy.

But I'm rambling now. There's no way any overhauls this deep would ever be implemented now. I still hold out hope for at least some tweaking and cleanup, but that's about it.

Yes, and also DU's backstory/history, where even if we're not actually playing through all that it is not something I can abide as a part of my PC.

And I also reject the claim that BG3 gives us a lot of choices. The game is one of the most railroady games of all time, and the choices are at best the illusion of choice.

Speaking of the Dark Urge - I am yet to find time and a damn to give to go through the game a second time, but from what I've seen, there's also barely any interconnection between the "you are tadpoled" plot and the "you are a Bhaalspawn or something to that extent, somehow" plot. Is that truly so?

No, the complete opposite is true. I can't tell you why without spoiling the entire plot of the Durge, but rest assured that that is not a problem the plot has.

A problem is that for non Durges, there is never a certain reveal in Act 3, which means Tav is forever a random whose character sheet you better have written.

I see, thanks. That does suggest that the default Tav was probably meant to be the DU's equivalent before they got split into a "blank slate" and a Dark Urge. Makes it all the more irritating that we have basically no options for customizing our background in any way, at least choosing not to be from BG or having the backgrounds actually matter in any way in the game apart from inspirations.

Responding to OP:

- The fear of losing oneself or changing to mindflayer is always there, all the way to the final battle. (This is toned down a lot compare with early access. It become a none stop temptation. Some like it, some hate it.)
- Characters using illithid power or not, are not changed due to Orpheus power, which he inherited from his mother. We only know this at the beginning of act 3.
- Shielding is not equal to solving. Tadpole still in the head.
- Doesn't matter which path, good or evil, characters are forced to face the Netherbrain because of the above. Walk away from the Baldur's Gate city is not an option.(Basically the todpole is the plot device to force characters to fight the final battle).
- Characters safety (or any consequence using illithid power) is only certain after winning the final battle.
Orpheus, or his mother's (Gith), power is the only way to keep one from losing to self. That power allow Gith to rebel and almost wipe out the ancient illithid empire. It was mentioned a few times in the game. (It is official 'lore' of the D&D world.) So it is not as simple as "strong mind".

So yes, it seems silly to not use illithid power, if and only if, we look back at the whole BG3 event. However, to the characters, they don't have a crystal ball gazing into future beforehand.

My main issue is that it's barely (if at all) integrated with the characters' individual plotlines. The tadpole and the companions' personal quests exist in isolation from one another. You could remove either and the other part will not be affected, safe for perhaps Lae'zel's storyline (to an extent).

Orpheus' role in the plot is handled very clumsily as well. If he's the one holding back the influence and the characters are perfectly fine with the Netherbrain being unshackled and him being out of the Prism, then what's stopping us from killing the Emperor early and simply remaining within the Prism's power's range? The Act 2-3 interlude makes the character transform instantly as soon as the Emperor dies, while "betraying" him at the end of Act 3 allows to go ahead and use the Hammer first. Orpheus' honour guard must have had some plans as to how to liberate him, for them to invade the Prism without the Orphic Hammer - it being yet another plot device which exists solely as an added complication. And if Orpheus blocks out the illithid influence, why would we have powers and telepathy in the first place?

As for the "strong mind", it's not the resistance to illithid influence, but retaining the memories and the personality upon transformation is what's an issue. An illithid kills its host upon completing ceremorphosis. Orpheus simply changing into one with no explanation given (one would assume he actually becomes a mind flayer rather than simply assumes a form of one if it's irreversible and it specifcally requires an actual mind flayer to counter the brain, for whatever reason (it amounts to focusing on a spell, which you'd imagine a powerful enough spellcaster with an intelligence/wisdom to match would have been able to do regardless)) is another moment that is hardly making much sense.

Up till prologue, all companions are from different part of The Forgotten Realm. They don't know each other. They aren't friends with other.

Then they all got on the nautiloid for whatever reason and got the todpoles. That is an isolated event in their lives.

So isn't it logical most of that their personal quests has nothing to do with the todpole?

That also give as much freedom to player as possible, from choices to skipping.




^^^ This is very good catch!!! For free Orpheus path, the (non)requirement of Orphic Hammer is definitely a plot hole. ^^^
PS: Second thought, in interlude the Emperor is killed, but before final battle Emperor run away. Does that make a difference? Or does that become another plot hole, hahaha!!


Orpheus used a todpole. In D&D soul/mind can be separate from body. So it is possible to have body go through physical change but keeping the soul/mind intact. It is a magical world But nonetheless, that physical change does affect his mental status. That's why he sought death after the final battle.

Unless Orpheus has been confirmed as a shifter, it remains a deus ex machina, especially considering that if he were that, there will be no need for a tadpole in the first place, nor would the ceremorphosis be instant were he to infect himself on purpose, especially since time doesn't pass on the Astral Plane.

Again, it's obvious that the companions are unrelated to one another (as for being from different places in the FR - 4 out of 6 come from Baldur's Gate (Shadowheart, Wyll, Astartion, Karlach)), the problem is that their conflict of faith and personality are not in any way affected by the tadpole or the Emperor nudging you to develop illithid powers. In fact, the Emperor does not interact with anyone but the PC at all. Considering that Shadowheart was the original attuner for the Prism, it's at least strange. Not much point in re-iterating the original post's points here.

Whether you want it or not, Tav is "the leader" of the group. Even on first invite to the party, the others tell you to "lead on". And both emperor and orfeus refuse to talk to any other party member, saying they are not ready for the task (or something like that ) and tell the unfortunate companion to send "the leader" to talk.
It"s one of the things that is a bit immersion breaking for me. Why does everyone automatically bow to me as leader ? Something to just accept and get over, I guess.

Funny thing, Orpheus sometimes uses a tadpole, and sometimes doesn't. If you accept the final tadpole from the emperor, but then instead of transforming, you force him to leave, Orpheus is going to use that tadpole. But if you never accept the tadpole from the emperor, Orpheus is going to turn into a mind flayer without the tadpole (since you don't have any). And there is no explanation provided.

Ah, so that's what it is. I was defying the Emperor at every turn in my run, so there was no tadpole in the final Prism scene, and Orpheus' transformation was pulled outta the arse for all intents and purposes.

Even then, the number of tadpoles given arbitrary powers for the sake of advancing the plot is getting rather ridiculous (two is already one too many...).

Ooof. I had no idea about half of this stuff. I've always wanted to play Divinity II but my first Divinity game was Dragon Commander which I assumed was just a side story. From what I've read, the pre-Dragon Commander games all revolve around demons and Damian and are somewhat connected. Then DOS1 comes out and the story revolves around Astarte and void stuff. Now, what do Astarte and the Dragon have to do with the Godking and the Seven of DOS2 I have no idea.

Coming into this game I knew there was going to be canon and continuity issues simply because it's a DnD game. In general, WotC doesn't respect the story of the video games even if Torment, HotU, and MotB are way better better than anything they ever came up with. I mean having Myrkul return after what happened in MotB is just lame. Though when it comes to this game everything seems disconnected from one act to the other, plot holes and inconsistencies in the main story and characters suddenly acting differently at certain points in the game.

I wasn't on the doomer side when it came to this game since Larian has listened to feedback when it came to gameplay (reaction system, push..etc) but this disjointed writing is pretty much a staple of Larian and should always be expected?

Myrkul coming back is more or less retconnable (the entirety of 5e is WotC pretending 4e never happened and just rebooting the setting like it was before the Spellplague, including resurrecting gods - if Mystra could be restored after what Shar did to her, then perhaps Myrkul could too? It's still a very cheap approach to world-building and one of the big reasons I don't care much for FR since 4e and afterwards).

As for the writing - more or less, yeah. Pre-D:OS days at least had an excuse of them having to barely finish the game running on the last good will of the publisher every time or heavily overestimating their capabilities (Divinity II's world map fits in a pocket of what was originally planned for the game - it's still an amazing game, mind you, with the expansion being especially neat). Beyond Divinity was written by Rhianna Pratchett of all people, and it seems like both that and Overlord are the only two good plots ever written by her. Now, though, their development still remains a poorly thought out melting pot it seems, and BG3 is a culmination of that AND greatly expanding their writing team in size but not in coordination and standard.

At the beginning of act 3, after the party helped Emperor fight off the Githyanki royal guards, he will to convince you to change. And even you refuse, he still hands you a tadpole. So you always have a tadpole in hand. Not sure what happen if you throw it away or destroy it (possible??). I kept it in camp stash. And if I let Orpheus change, the animation always show Tav handed something to Orpheus. Assuming it is the tadpole, as the animation only show hand/arm movment.

You can destroy the tadpole if you want to, though it doesn't really affect anything as far as I am aware.

Correct, Orpheus just magically transforms without any reason or trigger.

Basically Larian wrote themselves into a corner and instead of resolving it or rethinking their "there must be an illithid" nonsense they just brute forced it with no care for story consistency.

Who's to say the Emperor only had one astral tadpole? It's not unreasonable that he may have been secreting a spare or two.

Often it seems like some people would prefer to find flaws. Absence of knowledge presents as certainty.

Having a convenient plot device to just pull outta one's arse with no buildup or explanation as to how it got there because it means rewriting an otherwise poorly constructed story otherwise is not a sign of a good script.

And it seems even more often that people would jump to defending something objectively bad with a lot more rabidity than when something is actually good, because something good speaks for itself instead of needing a legion of apologists...

I don't think this is the same tadpole, this is the one that expands the powers. You can destroy it unless you have used too many.

Orpheus doesn't always use the tadpole for changing. I have tried both paths and his dialogue is different depending whether you have obtained the final tadpole from the emperor or not. There is even a dialogue option for when you obtain the final tadpole and drop it (this one you cannot destroy). I guess this is to prevent a situation where you can ask him to turn without the tadpole, than pick up the one you dropped and turn yourself.

This is also how you get Orpheus to accept Gale as a solution. He is not going to trust Gale unless you get the tadpole from the emperor, and then change your mind. If you dismiss the emperor instantly, Orpheus will not trust Gale. From a roleplaying point of view it makes no sense, that he only trusts someone who considered eating him, but not the one who refused his enemy. It is because of the mechanics if turning, so that if you change your mind about Gale, you can still turn mid battle if required.

It doesn't matter how many he has, the emperor will only offer one. And you can get him to leave without giving you any. Easiest is by attacking him, he just teleports out with no dialogue.

If you have Gale in the party, Orpheus entire dialogue is written around whether you have obtained the tadpole or not. That is why so many people have had problems in convincing Orpheus not to turn anyone into a mind flayer.

Changing such a integral part of the plot, down to the very bones of the soundtrack, themes and choice/consequence was easily the biggest mistake Larian made in production of this game, whether it was from fan feedback or simply because of making the game more "fun" as Larian claimed, we will never know. Needles to say we missed out on possibly one of the best narrative and moral choices we ever could have gotten in the game, it was there from conception and followed throu almost to release, sadly it was cut last minute and the damage is felt throgout the story. And ironically it was pointless because majority of the people still avoid using the tapdole powers, because of cours they would, its their character choices and should have been one of the major ones in the game, not an inconsequential one, and we ended up with a vastly different narrative that how it innitially seemed, even invlidating much of the established lore like with the artbook wich only features the Hearts Desire instead of the guardian or of course one of the main theme songs "down by the river" which now plays more role and makes no sense.

I love Bg3 for what it is, but I will always be sad about what it could have been if they didnt pull out at the last minute for no reason, I dont find no consequences for my actions more fun Larian, Illithid powers should be a choice, no matter how cool or how little people interacted with them.

I’m less critical of the story now than I was originally because some of it is decent even if there are a lot of well documented issues.

One thing that does continue to bug me is the “there must be an illithid at the end”

What is the reasoning here? Why couldn’t you have the option to free Orpheus and have him stay as. Gith? Why couldn’t the player opt for the Gale nuclear option without using either prism inhabitant?

Was this deliberate as far as story goes or does it have something to do with rushing the release of the game?

A mortal brain cannot defeat the elder brain as ithat entity can process all possible moves at once. It is always ahead of you. As the emperor explains, only an illithid brain has a chance to match the speed of thinking to make a move before the brain has a countermove ready.
Furthermore the one who combats the brain also needs to control the protection of Orpheus. So therefore the combination illithid power + orpheus power combined in one, is a prime requisite to move against the brain. So we canhave either Orpheus becoming illithid or an illithid acquiring Orpheus protection power.

I don't know how this works with Tav taking the illithid role though as I never tried that (and don't want to) and a less likable NPC, like Gale for instance, is not allowed to change. So if Tav can turn without eating Orpheus' brain then the story breaks down.

Except it isn't, because either Tav or Karlach work as a substitute, without taking Orpheus's powers.

personally i'm hoping for an evil ending ... something along the lines of 'here take this slave' and make her a squid or just have a magic hat that blocks the big evil brain from reading your mind then stab it in the back stem

That doesn't make sense, Elder Brains are killed all the time by mortals, without the need of an ilithid traitor.
Neither do have elder brains some special hyperintelligence. They are very intelligent, but so are dragons or even some mortals and no one would buy "to defeat a dragon you need a dragon".

Also "you can't outsmart a bullet", or in the case of D&D a sword. When you are hacked apart with magic weapons as you are big and immobile it doesn't matter if you can think a bit faster than your attacker. You are not playing high stakes chess.

Ok, let me clarify my point. Just to avoid miosunderstandings though, I'm not trying to start a right/wrong discussion. We're nor doing historical research here, but looking at a phantasy story in different ways.

Phantasy needs some degree of suspension of disbelief, opbviously. Why could the one ring not be wielded by Gandalf, Elrond or Galadriël to defeat Sauron easily ? Because Tolkien told you so. Does it make sense ? Only if you (the reader) want it to.

As for the brain's vulnerability. Yes you can harm it with weapons, but first you have to get there. Did you see the scene in Z'rells chamber where she kills her ogre servant just with a thought ? What if the brain can read all your thoughts as they form in your head, and can even predict what they will be before fully formed. You think I have this runepowder bomb that I could lob at the beast, but before that thought is complete, the brain knows you have a bomb on you and makes it explode in your pocket.

Realmspace history is not a good guidcance also. The original mindflayer empire was defeated with the help opf Tiamat. But this brain has evolved with the netherese magic from the crown it now owns. So, it has even more powers than the former empire, coming from old Netheril.

I did wonder about Tav changing though. Although it is a non-option for me in this game, but as confirmed above by Tarlonniel, this breaks the story down if you use it. It would have been better to leave it out altogether IMO.

I don't really like this ending either. I would have preferred a true happy ending. But for a writer it is probably more challenging and satisfactory to come up with something bittersweet or unexpected than a happy mellow end. The difference the writer fails to make, (as I see it) is that this is not a novel or a movie of a couple of hours, but a game where you invest hundreds of hours and really get into the skin of the player character. So the ending obviously impacts me harder. I hope that somehow that message would get through to Larian for their next game.

This is not a "Tolkin told you so" situation.
D&D is a brand an in this brand it has been established that elder brains while strong are still mortals and can be killed by other mortals without needing an Illithid.
Especially the Gith are very good at that and are one reason why most brains are in hiding.

But you ignore the power of the nethercrown. That is a "Tolkien told you so" situation. The emperor says that it is no longer an elder brain, but a netherbrain. Still mortal, but untouchable by creatues that do not match the psychic acumen and foresight of a mindflayer. Anyways, the player is the ultimate decider.

It will also be interesting to see if and what BG3 novelties will make it into DND lore.

Except that when you give this much power to the crown then it doesn't matter if you have an Illithid or not as they too are just mortals and not hyperintelligent (see how easy you can trick them in the tutorial for example), nor do they have any foresight powers. Chances are at least one character in the party ends up more intelligent than a mind flayer.
Neither is there any reason as for why a huge immobile brain requires much foresight to attack as it still mostly relies on minions to defend itself. The only thing needed is Orpheus protection or similar magic.

Because The One Ring corrupts those who are in its presence? And Ring itself seeks to return to its master (Hence why it calls to the Nazgul when it is worn).

It's clearly outlined when the Fellowship of the Ring is created, the reason why Frodo was tasked with carrying it (Despite many powerful people being at the creation of the Fellowship, including Gandalf) is because he, as a Hobbit (Of good nature) was resistant to the corrupting power of the Ring (Though, still susceptible, as is shown when he starts to turn on Sam late into his journey. Even Sam, with his good nature and temporary holding of the Ring starts to be corrupted when he dreams of becoming Samwise the Great).

This isn't a "Tolkien told you so" situation, but the a premise that is built upon throughout the entire story of The One Ring. Even going as far back as when the Ring was first severed from Sauron's hand, where instead of being destroyed right away, it corrupted Isildur who kept it and began to turn evil until he lost possession of it in the river where Smeagol eventually found it (And corrupted him too, turning him into Gollum)

The Rings of Power have influence over people (That is the basic premise of their title "Ring of Power"), with The One Ring having an influence that is pure evil in nature. This influence is more dangerous in the hands of people with innate power like Gandalf because of the sheer evil they can perform when they are corrupted (And being more innately magical, they are more susceptible to the power of the Ring) which is clearly evident in Saruman, who despite never being in the proximity of the Ring, becomes completely corrupted by it and does a lot of evil what with churning out Sauron's army and attempting to corrupt Gandalf.

It is never arbitrarily stated that this is a thing randomly. It's the core premise of the entire setting and thourougly explained and explored over the many works of Tolkien - From the mainstream works like The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings trilogy, to even the Silmarillium (Which is where much of the backstory around the Middle Earth setting is found)

I agree with everything you say, and the way I expressed it was obviously too short and blunt. Sorry for that. Comparing the storyline of BG3 to LOTR is not the best comparison, due to the vastness and amount of detail in the latter, but on the BG3 scale, we do have some similar kind of explanation for the power of the nethercrown. Raphaël wants it to subdue the rulers of all nine hells. Gale manages to use it to enter Godhood. So in the "hands" (by lack of a better expression) of an elder brain, its power would also increase beyond the normal mindflayer standards. (IT doesn't have the stones yet during the endgame, so still not the full power) But yea, I respect every other "founded" interpretation.
Let's say that I was triggered by the remark that "this must be a bug". I hope to show that it depends on interpretation.

BG3 on the other hand arbitrarily states many thing, but then shows the complete opposite.

It states (out of the blue, in violation to all D&D lore) that mind flayer think so much above any mortals that only they can mentally match the netherbrain (for reasons). But then it shows mind flayer that can easily be tricked into believing that you are on its side and masterminds that can do nothing to prevent you getting the hammer and freeing Orpheus, the hight of his manipulative power being "going shirtless", while his fallback plan is "surrender to brain".

(Speaking of hammer, it states that only the hammer can free Orpheus but then shows some random Gith being technically able to free him by punching the chains)

It states that the tadpoles are super dangerous, slowly eating your brain with you losing part of yourself every time you give in to its power. It then makes them a completely harmless powerup system with no negative effects which is completely under your control.

It states that returning to life is a complicated and noteworthy issue, including having a necromancer performing experiments to figuring it out and the whole overall plot in act 2 having the root cause of returning a person to life.
Then it makes death completely trivial to you by giving you huge stacks of revivify raise dead and even a true ressurection scrolls which function a lot better than what the spell normally does and giving you a sidekick that performs the most powerful form of ressurection for pocket change with no one making a comment about that. But both only works as long as it wouldn't inconvenience the plot.

@Ido58

Tks I think that answers my question as to whether it was a rushed release issue or deliberate writing.

I really dislike the whole Emperor storyline and Orpheus having to transform just makes it worse.

It also makes no sense that Orpheus can shield us from transformation but can’t shield the NB from reading our thoughts. I just think they made a real poor decision regarding Orpheus having to transform. The choice should have been either let the Emperor eat his brain or we free him and he fights alongside us as a Gith.

It’s an even stranger decision when you consider how much Larian seemed to like Gith characters. They could have given Orpheus some cool powers.

I never touched any of the later WotC-editions, but seeing from an AD&D (2e) standpoint, the whole Absolute crisis revolves around extremely modified tadpoles, specifically bred at Moonrise Towers, that conserve much more of the host's personality and memories than your standard ceremorphosis ever would. Fantasy aspects aside, Naegleria fowleri can eat your brain. So, they will kill you in pretty much the same way an illithid tadpole would, annihilating any vestiges of your mind. That's why everybody says illithids are eating souls and why you can't just reverse ceremorphosis with a simple spell. The resulting standard mind flayer, however, also needs about 10-20 years to learn how to properly illithid according to the original lore. They don't retain any memories, nor do levels, abilities, proficiencies, powers or traits, like elven longevity, transfer from the host to the resulting mind flayer. They spend the first two decades of their lives in momma's brine pool, learning how to swim before they can levitate. It's however not unusual for illithids to go rogue after their motherbrain dies and enjoy their freedom, like Omeluum or the Emperor. We only gradually find out during the game that there's something strange going on with our tadpoles, which is why I thought the change of theme and tempo is fine. We won't die within the usual few days, but when we're supposed to turn.

They way I took it, the Emperor may have been a standard mind flayer after his transformation, but he also was quite a powerful adventurer before that. Omeluum developed its own non-evil personality, regardless of who it was before, but the Emperor may have held some powerful artefact that preserved at least some of his original personality which made him special. Or yet again, the illithid he became simply got a bit weird with age. In the original game, mind flayers live about 125 years. To me he came across like this illithid-supremacist control freak whose plans were hit-and-miss most of the time and who had delusions of his own and his species' grandeur. In AD&D mind flayers are of "genius" intelligence. That's 17-18, still easily within range of a human. Neurology may play a part, of course, and the Absolute isn't your standard elder brain either.

Taking the illithids-only restriction at face value, my Tav would have preferred, after getting the Foundry Gondians to fix Karlach's heart for good, to give the Netherstones to Omeluum, free Orpheus and kill the Emperor on the spot for even suggesting treason.

I didn't try to use anything else on Orpheus' chains, but when Lae'zel struck with the hammer she shouted "Vlaakith's will be done!" I blame the Zaith'isk.