If Sarevok and the PC can't be resurrected because Bhaalspawn cease to exist when they're killed, how come Imoen has no such problem?
I think the problem here is that Imoen was eventually given a much bigger role in the games than the creators originally envisioned. She was never meant to be in the first game at all, but was created because there was no good-aligned thief available early in the game. She was supposed to die in prison in the second game, but because she was popular they let her live. I don't know when it was decided that she would be Bhaalspawn, but I'm guessing it was after the first game came out for sure. On a similar note - Sarevok didn't cease to exist after Charname killed him, or else he wouldn't have been able to turn up in Throne of Bhaal. The whole 'Bhaalspawn resurrection' issue is really, really sketchy across the board. It would also most likely be a deal-breaker for players, that would result in Imoen being almost useless. Possibly Bhaalspawn can be resurrected, but upon doing so they lose Bhaal's essence. This would explain why the game ends when CHARNAME dies (as the plot would no longer make sense), why Imoen doesn't develop any Bhaal powers, and why Sarevok is no longer a Bhaalspawn after BG 1. In BG 2, Imoen can't die until after her soul's been given to Bodhi, so if you assume that canonically she made it through BG 1 without dying, that would make sense too. I would be completely willing to chalk it up to Gameplay and Story Segregation if it weren't for that one derp line where she references dying. Which happens in To B, at which point the writers have no excuse. Irenicus seems a lot more interested in Imoen's soul than yours, apparently finding it to be in some way unique. In addition many Bhaalspawn exhibit unique abilities that are not related to their race/class (such as the slayer form, or teleporting peasants). Taking these two facts, I believe that Imoen's inability to truly die was the way her Bhaalspawn power manifest itself.
Comments