No character in Baldur’s Gate 3 is debated over as much as the Emperor. The decision to side with him or Orpheus is one of the biggest choices in the game, and players aren’t given an obvious answer about whether they should keep him at their side. On the one hand, he is the reason why the player is alive, but on the other, it is understandable that the player would assume a mind flayer has ulterior motives.

[Warning: Spoilers for Baldur’s Gate 3, Act 3.]

With the game having now been released for over a year, fans are still divided about the Emperor being good or evil. He is an essential part of the plot, and the story would have gone differently – likely a lot worse – without him. Despite this, many people still decide to choose Orpheus over him, so what makes the Emperor’s ideals so difficult to place?

The Emperor Stays True To His Word, And Is A Crucial Part Of The Storyline

It Makes Perfect Sense That Balduran Would Want To Protect His Own City

If the player decides to trust the Emperor, then he will essentially be nothing but helpful. He is the reason why players are able to save Baldur’s Gate without their party turning into mind flayers, which is made clear when fighting Orpheus’ honor guard in the Astral Plane – if they decide to kill the Emperor, they will transform immediately. Although it may not seem noble to hold Orpheus captive, he would not have been willing to help the player from the start in the same way the Emperor does, since he still views the infected as illithid.

Lots of players assume that the Emperor infected them at the start of the game – however, if players use Speak with Dead on the mind flayer in the goblin camp before Dror Ragzalin is able to, they will recognize it as being the one that actually infected them. If the player later succeeds and is able to defeat the elder brain, then they can become free of their parasite if they have decided not to become illithid. Though his methods may be questionable, the Emperor still upholds his end of their deal for the player to have their tadpole removed.

The player can ask the dead mind flayer in the goblin camp why they abducted them – they can also ask a question about the nautiloid they were on, which further solidifies that this is the specific mind flayer that infected them in the opening cutscene.

The Emperor will only take over the Netherbrain at the end of Baldur’s Gate 3 if convinced to by the player, which implies that his motivations aren’t power-driven, but out of a genuine desire to be free – which he reiterates himself. It’s in his best interest to keep the party alive, since he needs allies in the material plane in order to collect the Netherstones and defeat the Chosen. He’s also not the only rogue mind flayer in the game – Omeluum is also free from the elder brain’s influence, but it is the Emperor who takes the initiative to save his old city.

At The End Of The Day, The Emperor Is A Mind Flayer – Can He Really Be Trusted?

The Emperor’s Manipulative And Self-Preserving Nature Leaves Players To Debate His Motives

It’s undeniable that the Emperor is manipulative. He consistently speaks to the player in half-truths or just flat-out lies, offering them a chance to be rid of their parasite and claiming that he too wants to be rid of a tadpole – though it’s up to the player to decide whether these lies are necessary. Though it’s true that he may have once wanted to be rid of his illithid influence, by the time players meet him, he appears to have fully embraced it – encouraging the player to do the same.

As a mind flayer, it’s hard to believe that the Emperor is capable of viewing the player as being on the same level as him, as he is objectively on a much higher cognitive level than they are. He doesn’t seem to truly care about the player, and simply sees them as a means to an end. It isn’t necessary for him to attempt to seduce them in Act Three, yet he does so anyway in order for the player to feel closer and more connected to him, to build up trust.

If the player decides not to side with him, then he will leave to join the elder brain, seemingly dooming Faerûn to the fate he was trying to fight against, while saving his own life. He always acts in his own self-interest, and doesn’t care who he needs to hurt or step over to achieve this – whether it be the player, Ansur, or Stelmane. Though this is an understandable motivation, his decisions still paint him as a coward who is willing to kill his best friend or abandon his allies instead of doing the morally correct thing.

Orpheus is more than willing to side with the player if they become illithid, though he would likely be less inclined to side with the one that held him captive. That’s not to say that a truce would be entirely impossible if the Emperor found it within himself to consider it. It’s understandable that the Emperor would be distrustful of the githyanki because of the lore between them and mind flayers, but it does seem like freeing Orpheus in BG3 results in a better ending than siding with the Emperor, as Orpheus being dead leaves the githyanki to the mercy of Vlaakith.

Baldur’s Gate 3’s Story Leaves The Emperor’s Morality Open To Interpretation

The Emperor Is A Neutral Character – His Motivations Are Whatever Suits Your Story

It’s hard to say the Emperor is a good person, but it’s also hard to completely call him “evil” – though the fact that there is nothing to firmly lay out to the player whether the Emperor is evil may also be a testament to his manipulation. Players are more willing to doubt themselves when not given a clear answer, and either way, they’re left to wonder if they made the right choice. However, the “right” choice may genuinely be whatever the player decides – this isn’t the most satisfying answer, but it may be the one with the most merit.

Siding with either Orpheus or the Emperor and defeating the brain will result in a good ending, so the question of the Emperor’s morality may be entirely up to the player to decide: the Emperor can be perceived as malevolent or benevolent depending on the player’s choices. Perhaps similarly to how they can make decisions for the Origin characters, pushing Astarion towards or away from ascension, or encouraging Shadowheart to become a Dark Justiciar or embrace her past.

Near the end of the game, the player needs to roll a persuasion roll to convince the Emperor to take over the Netherbrain, which would also be considered as an “evil” ending. Though comparing him to the Origin characters, most people would consider non-ascended Astarion to be his “true” self, despite that also requiring players to persuade him not to take Cazador’s place because it’s his “good/better” ending. Because of this, the Emperor could be considered evil in the same way Ascended Astarion can be.

Whether he was completely lying from the start depends on whether the player believes him to be; he only chooses betrayal when the player perceives him as evil. If they side with him, regardless of their use of the parasites, then he will congratulate them and give them no trouble – though the narrator will note that it’s hard to tell if he’s being sincere. Baldur’s Gate 3 players may find the Emperor unlikable, but he can be a very good ally who acts accordingly to the player’s choices, which is likely why the question of his morality is so debated.