Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion The Emperor tadpoled us!

Absolutely it was the Emperor that tadpoled us. I remember it hit me like a ton of bricks on my second playthrough upon seeing the opening cinematic again. I had found Gortash's letter in my first run but still didn't put it together. But watching that opening cinematic again, I saw the outfit and the dead mindflayers around him and I just thought "That motherf*cker."

I even sided with him the first time. Never again.

The thing I really hate about the idea of the Emperor being the one who tadpoled us is that if it's true and what Larian intended, then we as Tav aren't able to react to that fact. They've denied us the agency to learn that truth and make ourselves heard about it. Which is why as far as I'm concerned, that's not the case and the Emperor didn't tadpole us. Because otherwise we're just in the frustrating position of never being able to confront the person who put us in the position we're currently in and voice our feelings, be they anger or forgiveness. That information should be a major turning point for our character, something that should impact them, but it can't because it's never given to us in-game. I think that if it were true, then that just makes the game worse than it already is.

The entire Emperor story was shoehorned in at the last minute and is a railroad from start to finish, so this would be par for the course.

The message from all this is: If you screw up the story of your video game, screw up the beginning, not the ending. Yes, I am talking to you, Mass Effect 3.

It was a generic illithid model back in the EA days, and the Emperor didn't exist in this current form until late enough into development that the artbook was already complete and shipped by then.

Reading too much into a plot that was stitched together from poorly aligned bits, I am afraid.

I notice a lot of folks saying the Emperor was a late addition to the game, as if the character of the Emperor was shoehorned in at the last moment.

There's no evidence for that. Changing Daisy into the Guardian has nothing to do with whether or not the Emperor was always the force behind the dream figure.

I maintain that it was always the Emperor.

In fact, I remember back in early access when they changed the look of the mind flayers at the helm on the nautiloid. At the time, I wondered why. They noticeably changed the head. I believe this was specifically done to make it obvious that another mind flayer was responsible for the tadpoling.

That mind flayer turned out to be the Emperor. All the clues are there. They've been there from the very beginning, way back in early access.

I remember making a theory thread about how the dream persona was coming from someone inside the artifact, and that it was associated with the initial gith rebellion. People came in left and right into that thread and dismissed the idea, certain that it was all coming from the tadpole. Later on, when it turns out the theory was right, those same people insisted that it all must have been a last minute change by Larian.

The visualization and sound change for the Flayer on the bridge from EA compared to release is the first thing that stands out. Maybe that was in the last EA patch and I just slept on it, cause he for sure has a different head and voice now, the dude on the bridge I mean. Like the way he says "thrall" and such. Whereas before all the flayers looked and sounded identical. If the Emperor tadpoled Lae'zel in the opening cinematic that just makes me feel all the more righteous about siding with Orpheus and the Githyanki over him. I rewatched it again just now try to see if I could read it as resignation or desperation rather than manipulation or malice, and there's a few points where he kind of appears to hesitate, or like maybe choosing a particular tadpole, but then when he comes back towards the player character's POV, it's all orange pearls radiating malice again, and hard to see anything else there. If the whole thing is coming hot off the heist, and Emperor is piloting the getaway, it makes it a bit strange that he'd be warping out at the last second into the prism somehow. That bit is a lot less clear. I guess it might all have benefited from that idea floated early on that instead of just having dreams or flashbacks, where we "see" what it happened, it might have been cool to have dreams that included gameplay for the exposition.

I could imagine something similar for any of the dream remembrances, where it might become a Nightmare mini level and we play out the memory. That's where I thought Daisy would lead us, but then in EA I thought my analog would be Total Recall, whereas for the full release it became more Groundhog Day and absurdist for me. Anyhow, if it was the Gith heist and all that, guess it also explains Shadowheart's apprehension towards Lae'zel, like if she'd just watched Buddug Vriss and Kurk Deepcroft and whoever get cut in half by badass Githyanki greatswords right before getting scooped into her pod. Dangerous company for sure. Sets up a pretty awkward choice in the initial reveal later on. We'd all maybe be blowed up already if it weren't for the tadpole sure, but clearly it's Orpheus' presence that even makes that a possibility as much as the Emperor's. The idea that I'm going to pick that dude over Lae'zel when push comes to shove is kinda laughable. It's going to be Prince and the revolution all day every day in that case. Then at the end he's all, 'yeah I'm going to "absorb" Orpheus' essence', as if the Emperor were a total Skeksi, and at every point Lae'zel's every reaction is pretty much always 'over my dead body!' to any of that. So of course, it's gotta be Gith over Flayers at the very end. Plus they were always sorta the underdog in the Gith vs Illithid lore for me, like the Illithid always seemed to have the scarier psionic powers.

But then the hangup is the eye color, because the Flayer that tapoles us has the orange eyes, whereas the Emperor has purple eyes now.




ps. Knock on, so for the chromatics of the eyes, Omeluum's are definitely more yellow/gold in hue, sometimes drifts green in the lighting. Perhaps there's some internal lore with the color chromatics like RGB lightsabers in the OST? In that case if they wanted to hammer it home, they could maybe change the Emperor's eye color back to Orange or push even more Red if he pulls the mask and drops all pretense at empathy after we choose Orpheus.

Then you'd get an idea identical to Star Wars, where Redshift is towards the self and Blueshift is away from the self (towards the other) like Vader and Obi Wan basically. Then you get an Omeluum somewhere in the middle, like Luke with the green saber (yellow if we go with the toys.) This could all be expressed subtly in the flayer eye color.



Along these lines, if they sold BG3 action figures they could play with this idea more in the itemization. I don't really need the flayer statue. I want one of Lae'zel! But going there anyway, maybe you get the InfraRed eyed flayer and another UltraViolet eyed flayer, for like a doubles thing.

I would probably get both just so Lae'zel would have two to fight heheh.

Like come on though right, Battlemaster Lae'zel with hella weapons choices! Shadowheart with her alternating Shar/Selune outfits and kit! Seems like a winner to me.

First wave should be the fab 5 and Minthara with the Goblins.

Second Wave Karlach, Halsin, Jaheira, etc

The Emperor as the big bad. Like basically the Emperor is Vader in this analogy, even though that may be somewhat confusing hehe. Third wave they toss in Scratch and Withers and a few skeletons like that, Fourth Wave Ketheric, Orin, Gortash, Raphael and any standouts like Alfira and Florrick maybe a Robocop and Spectator- you get the idea. Good to go! They should totally do that.

I'd settle for partha style miniatures too, but if they made 'em articulated and slightly larger more like gi joe or barbie, I mean that would just hit right now! I wish that was a thing. Early Bird special for the Owlbear!

I could be wrong, but should "Dark Urge" actually have 2 tadpoles in its skull?
Why did it need another larva now? If not, why didn't this mind flayer know that there was already a tadpole?

The emperor was enslaved to the brain until he got the Astral prism which freed him. Upon getting it he would be desperate to find a way to kill the brain before it was strong enough to overpower the prism.

That should be the case, Durge's tadpoling seems very different than Tav's, The Dark Urge storyline would contradict the beginning cutscene if Durge only had 1 Tadpole.

Spoilers Ahead
Also the guy who Tadpoled us isn't the Emperor, all you need to do is look at the Eyes, most Mindflayers have generic Orange eyes but the Emperor however has Purple eyes which makes him unique compared to other mindflayers.

The Dark Urge does contradict the opening cinematic, and they're not the only one, because it was made very early in development and intended only for Tav's perspective.

It is a relic from early development when the game's narrative used to be incredibly consistent with all of the gameplay aspects while Tav was the only playable character, because it was tied to the Dreamer as the very beginning of their relationship. Which is why as soon as we get tadpoled the Dreamer asks "Who are you?" and the character creation opens, thus becoming known as "the Voice on the ship" to both the main character and Shadowheart (not other companions because their dreamers were all unique to them).

Since then plenty of new stuff got added, plenty of stuff got cut and tons of stuff completely rewritten, which is why the cinematic does not fit anyone playing as the Dark Urge, Lae'zel, Karlach and Wyll.

• Lae'zel can't be roleplayed since her being tadpoled is from another person's perspective.
• Karlach and Wyll can't be roleplayed at all since they only get tadpoled afterwards in Avernus.
• And Dark Urge can't be roleplayed since they were tadpoled weeks prior to the Nautiloid event.

So the Dark Urge is not tadpoled twice nor even tadpoled on the Nautiloid, that is simply Tav in the cinematic who it was originally made for.

Which is why Larian should have separated the spawn pods for Tav and Durge, and to keep the narrative consistent place Tav's corpse in the original pod if the player ain't playing them (similarly to what they did with Durge if the player doesn't play him).

At another point in the game it tells us that we are standing in front of the corpse of the individual mindflayer who implanted the tadpol.
From this point of view, it could never have been the Emperor.

I don't know Larian's policy on additional content, it's my first Larian game.
But I would be really happy if Larian would now work on the weak points of the plot. And not just "give the NPC standing on the corner the happy ending he deserves".
The Dark Urgeand the Emperor in particular still deserve some more attention in order to correct the one or other unevenness in the consistency.

The link I sent earlier is worth reading. It addresses some of the points that have been made re: eye color and the mindflayer in the goblin camp.

There's a contradiction in the mind flayer dialogues. One option makes it clear that this wasn't the mindflayer who abducted you - it's clothes are plainer and features are different - another makes it clear that it IS the mindflayer who abducted you. This should be cleaned up.

On the eyes - yes the emperor has purple eyes. But also note that Lae'zel looks different, different facial markings, different war paint, fuller face, different armor. But it's clearly her.

Also note that orange eyes are used as sign of illthid domination in the cinematics that the emperor shows us. So it could mean that he was being dominated while tadpoling Tav.

But I'm going for option 1. The emperor knew what he was doing, he tadpoled us and the differences in appearance are due to the age of the cinnematic. Larian just tweaked his design.

Has anyone seen the artbook? they're usually an interesting roadmap of a stories development, you see old designs, dropped plot points, lots of things that might tell us about why the characters changed or even if they existed.




I think this is the first time I've managed to log-in in weeks, I'm sorry it wasn't for anything more insightful...

The most glaring find, the Emperor is not in it. Neither is the Guardian. But Daisy is.

Larian scrapped large parts of the story very late in development to shove in the Emperor to have consequence free tadpoles and no long term consequence of your actions.
And the game is all the worse for it as it resulted in a disjointed and just bad story.

Lae'zel from the trailer looks like her old character concept, Gale went through some face morphs in EA. Sarth Baretha, from the githyanki patrol, was dark haired in EA and is blonde in the game. None of these changes have any meaning.

I think the emperor was planned to be Balduran, but not the dream person originally. Because if he were, there would not be so many inconsistencies in the main plot. Frankly, the later parts of the story are in need of both playtesting and editing, and point towards a rather hastily done rewrite.

You suspect this is true. That's fine.

But you present your suspicion as fact. Do you have an argument to support your position? A real argument?

I believe "Daisy" was always the Emperor. The only change made was that Daisy became the Guardian, and I believe that happened because some players took issue with the non-consensual sexual aspect of Daisy. Certain players expressed that they felt violated, and I *believe* that Larian ultimately decided they didn't want to open that can of publicity worms at full release.

However, you apparently disagree. Do you believe that Daisy was the tadpole all along? Do you have any reason to believe that other than that's what you would have preferred? Were you so convinced that was the case in early access that you couldn't conceive that you may have misinterpreted what was going on?


What *specifically* about the later parts of the story point toward a hastily done rewrite? Specifically? Like details. Like, "this event indicates a hastily done rewrite."

I feel like people are making wild statements without any arguments to back any of it up. It would be like if Sherlock Holmes said the bite mark in the apple came from a sailor with a bad limp but failed to explain why.

I happen to agree that Act III needs work. But I don't think that has anything to do with a hastily done rewrite. But you feel like it "points" toward that, meaning you must have some sort of evidence as only evidence can point toward a conclusion. The natural result of that thought process is: share the evidence?

1. Not having Emperor in the artbook despite his importance of the story and the artbook otherwise spoiling everything.
2. Larians contradictionary communication regarding the danger of tadpoles when in the game they pose 0 threat (unlike in EA)
3. The difference between EA and release where Daisy was directly tied to tadpole use which also always was commented by losing more and more of yourself (which is still in the game and makes no sense)
3.5. Daisies desire for you to lose yourself (down by the river) not matching then motives of the Emperor.
4. Larian requiring retcons to add the Emperor/Balduran connection instead if doing it more elegantly

For starters, it is how the party stops looking for a cure once you arrive in the city. Even though this is where it would make sense, with the high level clerics and temples - not that you have access to them, since they were mostly in the northern district). Of course, there is Raphael, who in act one has promised to fix it all "like this" once you arrive exactly at this point. But in act three he offers you the hammer, which does not fix much. And if you are allied with the emperor, it doesn't even present a temptation. I think Orpheus, unlike the emperor, is actually in the artbook (though I'd have to check again), so perhaps originally he could have actually provided a cure.

I also never found an explanation as to why Gale detonating the orb in act two causes everyone to transform into mind flayers, but when he does the same in act three everyone is cured. It even reverses the partial transformation. I suspect some chunk of Gale's story is missing as well, because you can find information that in order to control Karsus' weave, you need the crown, orb and scepter. The scepter is however not in the game. And on the topic of Gale, you can learn by playing his origin that a god has the power to restore a mind flayer's soul. Yet Withers does not even mention it.

Then there is the ending itself. The dialogue that is required to avoid transforming anyone into mind flayer if you have Gale in the party and side with Orpheus is nonsensical. So is Orpheus transforming using the tadpole, or without it, depending on whether you have obtained the tadpole. The last of which I suspect was added, because shortly after BG3 was launched, WotC advertised a tabletop adventure where mind flayers could transform people remotely (I don't play p&p, so I only learned of this from the Larian discord).

I think these narrator lines could have originally referred to the character's soul being slowly destroyed. But now it does not make sense, since using the powers is in fact reversible, even if you completely fill your character's brain with tadpoles.