Quote
an interesting point relating to something in the OPs post, specifically about how the Emperor may scold us, but he never tries to dominate us when we do something like go to the creche. Can he actually do that? Is that something he's capable of given the effects of the prism itself? It's stopping us from being dominated by the Absolute, so really we should be free from being dominated by a lesser illithid. Though I suppose we do see from act 1 in the crashed nautiloid that we can at least be controlled. But really I think we shouldn't be, just from a logical standpoint. But then the prism seems very inconsistent in howits protection works anyway.

Canonically, yes he can interfere. In act 3
if you try to enter the Upper City The Emperor will panic and tell you to turn back as you're getting too close to the brain too soon and risk being dominated. You'll start to get the mind broken condition and hear the brain's commands. If you keep going, The Emperor will tell you again to turn back. If you keep going still, he'll warn you that he'll "act on your behalf." And if you still keep going after that, once you reach the gate the screen fades to white and you and your companions are back near the waypoint. I don't know if you're teleported or forced to walk back since the game is unclear on that.
I do agree that there are inconsistencies with the prism, but I tend to lean towards that being a plot contrivance that doesn't negatively impact the narrative, (or at least doesn't impact it enough for me personally), though I can see why others may disagree.


Quote
There is little room for binaries with a character as nuanced as The Emperor.

Thank you, and I fully agree.


Quote
If there are no nuances to the Emperor or any mind flayer for that matter, like Swen implies in the interview, then forcing upon players/companions the choice of becoming one/giving up any identity (at the very end of an RPG!) is just a really cruel plot: one way or another you're going to become a monster.

And it's because of the contrived binary nature of that ending, it comes across as a mere joke / a place holder ending for a seemingly unfinished game: clearly they can't be serious about it (but according to the interview, sadly they are.)

Even though I didn't like the Emperor at all and maybe therefore I missed to notice any nuances, I think making him that rouge mind flayer with a fleshed out personality/identity and actual choices at the end would be a huge improvement as it would allow us to interact with someone (instead of another some*thing* being forced upon us, because surely the tadpole isn't enough already).

The fact that people are not able to decide if the nuances to the Emperor are intentional or accidental might itself be a fully intentional choice by Swen and the writers. While in theory this makes a great "solution" to a "story problem", on the emotional level this ambiguity doesn't work whatsoever.

I do think there was a lot of intentionality to making The Emperor's nuances up for interpretation. I can understand where some players see those nuances as manipulation, and others like me think there's more to those nuances besides just manipulation. I don't think there's a binary with The Emperor that he's either manipulating the pc and they're merely a means to an end, or he's looking out for the pc and cares for them on a deeper level besides utility. I think there's both going on there, and they're not as contradictory as they may seem. I also agree that that ambiguity is frustrating. There seems to be this intentionality that The Emperor is what you make of him, but even that is muddy because there does seem to be an actual character under his manipulations. Companions like Astarion and Shadowheart can have very different outcomes depending on player choices, but their characters are fleshed out in a way that provides better emotional and narrative satisfaction, while The Emperor's suffers from what I believe is incomplete writing. Fleshing out more of his story would go a very long way in resolving these issues.