Read on Twitter
Never once in a DA game did I get the impression I was *supposed* to like the Chantry. I see a lot of discourse about how the Chantry is painted in a positive light, and I just... I’ve never felt anything better than neutral and suspicious? And I started with origins.
Certainly, we are given positive interactions with the Chantry, as well as positive interactions with Chantry-aligned characters. Even still those characters either go through a period of disagreement/faith questioning OR they demonstrate darker aspects of the organization
Even more so, we’re shown the corruption first hand, whether it’s through our eyes as the PC or through our companions and NPCs. We have the Chantry shoved down our throats with anything other than a devout andrastian character who openly proclaims fealty to the maker
We see the abuses heaped upon Mages by the Chantry and the Templars. We also (more controversially) see the abuses heaped upon the templars by the chantry who often recruits them as kids, indoctrinates them, and gets them addicted to lyrium to leash them
We know Anders’ trauma, we know what happens to Cole at the White Spire, and we have literally had multiple Chantry-aligned villains. Does the game itself ever come out and say “the chantry is objectively bad”? No.
But it presents us with evidence to make decisions for ourselves. There IS a bias in Thedas toward the Chantry, on the part of the characters in that world. Not on the part of the writers and game meta. We’re shown ample evidence that the Chantry is problematic.
Even the majority of Thedosians are unaware and misled to that fast. After all, one of the major themes of the franchise is that power is ultimately corruptive and the Chantry is so good at using its power to convince people all of its actions are justified by the maker
Even and especially when they’re abhorrent.
That’s just my two cents, though
That’s just my two cents, though
