626 réponses à ce sujet

[MissCurlsbel]

Blood magic? BAD. BADBADBADBADBAD!!!

I think it's bad and just can't bring myself to do it. Doesn't matter if you have good intentions, it always leads to disaster in one way or another.

[Laughing_Man]

MisterJB wrote...

TheRedVipress wrote...
Nobles seizing power:
This is something that could happen anyway, with any system.
The Idea here is to make a strong body, much like the chantry, led not by religious zeal, but by logic and with more regard to morality. Such a strong body will not be easily intimidated by a single noble.
(and when I said soldiers, I didn't mean grunts, obviously.)
The strength of this body could come from the inquisition.

I'm not talking about a single noble. I'm saying that by choosing people from so many different stratas of life, you're bound to pick people who simply have more means than the others; means they will use to direct the arguments in ways that benefit them. How can a body be so strong as to be able to resist the very will of its members?
And, assuming the Inquisition will last long enough, it might have the strenght to impose the decisions of this body but how will it decide which decisions must be implemented? Does the ultimate power rest in the hands of the First Inquisitor? What if he is corrupt or just an easily swayed fool?

Plus, the decisions of the Chantry were very much lead by logic and morality. Otherwise, all mages would just be killed or Tranquilised the moment they were discovered.

"Qualification":
As we agreed, no one is really qualified. The chantry just forced it's will on everyone else.
And considering that at this point large amounts of excrement hit the fan, and considering that it's clear that the chantry is at fault at least to some degree, the Inquisitor is probably the most qualified man to do something about it.
He has the power, and large amounts of authority.
That makes him as close to qualified that you can come in my book.
Of course, it's for the player to decide what the Inquisitor will actually do with his power.

But all that is irrelevant really, qualified or not, the question is can you take a classical FUBAR and make it better?
If you can, then you are qualified.

Seriously? You don't see the double standard you're applying?
You're saying that you can accept the Inquisitor doing something about the current state of Thedas because he "has the power and large amount of authority" and that you think he is qualified if he can take a FUBAR and make it better and yet, that is exactly what the Chantry did.
They had the power and the authority so they did something about the world. And given that previously to its creation, Southern Thedas was plagued by Abominations and Demons who rampaged through the countryside unnoposed; and this is not bias, Brother Genitivi could be one of the most unbiased and fair minded people in Thedas and this comes from him; I'd dare say the people would agree that they improved the "FUBAR".
I can even use the argument that the mages were largely responsible for it.

Of course, you can also decide that you are simply going to kill every mage you can, and put the rest in a prison so harsh, that those mages will be jealous of the qunari ones.
But that is just the kind of thinking that will make every mage alive out there - even the kindest and gentles among them - fight you to the death and bring the world crushing on your head.
Then you can be the king of the wasteland. If you are still alive that is.

It's very funny to see to what lengths people are willing to go to explain why you just CAN'T be reasonable,
and why you should continue to use a fanatic, cruel, and broken system, depite the fact that we are still busy taking care of the disaster that this system caused.

The Circle system was neither fanatic, nor cruel or broken and it was not responsible for this disaster. The mages not abbiding by it was what caused this disaster.

It all boils down to one point in my opinion.
I strongly believe in a "Live and let live" system.

If your ideology has enough room in it for other opinions, and is willing to extend the same courtesy to me, meaning allowing me my freedom as long as I don't prove myself to be a murdering psychopath, than we will get along marvelously.

However, if your religion or ideology or whatever you want to call it thinks itself infallible, and is unwilling to extend to me the same courtesy of "live and let live", than we are going to have a serious problem.

Unwillingness of said religion to find a mutually beneficial compromise, will make this situation even worse.

If I was a mage, facing templars with this kind of mind-set, I would probably fight them to the death.
And that death won't be mine if I have anything to say about it. (because dark magic or no, at this point there would be not alot left to lose by using blood-magic.)

I will respond to one point though:
"The Circle system was neither fanatic, nor cruel or broken and it was not responsible for this disaster. The mages not abbiding by it was what caused this disaster."

I can think of multiple examples of cruelty and fanaticizm, and if you are not too busy blindly defending the chantry, I'm sure you can too, and that in my humble opinion, makes it broken.

Modifié par TheRedVipress, 02 octobre 2013 - 04:38 .

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

From cjones I expected no less. On the other hand, I know you are more intelligent than this.
That codex speaks of mages meeting their families, yes but also of training female mages in the way of the Seers which involve possession and wordly power. Therefore, it is disingenuous to claim that the main reason for that Annulment was something like mages meeting their families; especially given the fact the Templars involved haven't had a chance to defend themselves.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers.  Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

Rivain is a nation divided between Qunari, Traditionalists and Chantry faithful. The Circle is said to have been mostly a front to appease the Chantry but it was still a Circle which means that, as an institution, it was affiliated with the Chantry and subject to its laws, one of which happens to be the Right of Annulment.

Also, given that Rivain is a patchwork of cultures, two of them hostile to magic, I'd say the love for these Seers is not universal and if the presence of love is evidence of Seers doing good, then the absence of it in 2 out of 3 cultures that form Rivain must be evidence of Seers doing harm.

[DKJaigen]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

From cjones I expected no less. On the other hand, I know you are more intelligent than this.
That codex speaks of mages meeting their families, yes but also of training female mages in the way of the Seers which involve possession and wordly power. Therefore, it is disingenuous to claim that the main reason for that Annulment was something like mages meeting their families; especially given the fact the Templars involved haven't had a chance to defend themselves.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers.  Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

Rivain is a nation divided between Qunari, Traditionalists and Chantry faithful. The Circle is said to have been mostly a front to appease the Chantry but it was still a Circle which means that, as an institution, it was affiliated with the Chantry and subject to its laws, one of which happens to be the Right of Annulment.

Also, given that Rivain is a patchwork of cultures, two of them hostile to magic, I'd say the love for these Seers is not universal and if the presence of love is evidence of Seers doing good, then the absence of it in 2 out of 3 cultures that form Rivain must be evidence of Seers doing harm.

nice speculations. i can do it to: te templars purged the riviani circles because they bloodthirsty self righteous ****s. As usual you have no evidence but at first glance the templars have violated their own laws.

Oh btw not even the ****'s had laws like the rite of annulment

Modifié par DKJaigen, 02 octobre 2013 - 12:51 .

[Medhia Nox]

@DKJaigen: You are grossly uneducated if you think the group you just evoked didn't liquidate ghettos.

That statement is so profoundly ignorant. The level of atrocity committed by MANY real groups (mostly nations in their empire building) is so much worse than anything the Rite of Annulment is for.

And before someone thinks they're being clever.. no, I am not excusing the Rite of Annulment.  But don't compare real world atrocities to them if you don't understand those atrocities.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 02 octobre 2013 - 02:36 .

[cjones91]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

From cjones I expected no less. On the other hand, I know you are more intelligent than this.
That codex speaks of mages meeting their families, yes but also of training female mages in the way of the Seers which involve possession and wordly power. Therefore, it is disingenuous to claim that the main reason for that Annulment was something like mages meeting their families; especially given the fact the Templars involved haven't had a chance to defend themselves.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers.  Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

Rivain is a nation divided between Qunari, Traditionalists and Chantry faithful. The Circle is said to have been mostly a front to appease the Chantry but it was still a Circle which means that, as an institution, it was affiliated with the Chantry and subject to its laws, one of which happens to be the Right of Annulment.

Also, given that Rivain is a patchwork of cultures, two of them hostile to magic, I'd say the love for these Seers is not universal and if the presence of love is evidence of Seers doing good, then the absence of it in 2 out of 3 cultures that form Rivain must be evidence of Seers doing harm.

You sure like making assumptions about a culture where mages aren't branded as evil.Seers were said to be highly respected and the Rivaini turned to them for help,that does'nt sound sound like the propoganda you're spouting.

Also I did'nt miss your little quip that suggested I was ignorant about what happened to the Rivaini mages and Seers.I did my research when I first heard about the ROA in Rivain and the Codex entry says one of the key reasons why the templars were there was because the Seers and Rivaini mages were in contact with their families.The Seers being possessed was a known fact but the Chantry hates it when mages are given outside contact and they start to miss their families.

But hey I guess hundreds of men,women,and children being massacred because of such a petty reason is alright with you.The templars were clearly in the wrong for what happened in Rivain.

[cjones91]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

From cjones I expected no less. On the other hand, I know you are more intelligent than this.
That codex speaks of mages meeting their families, yes but also of training female mages in the way of the Seers which involve possession and wordly power. Therefore, it is disingenuous to claim that the main reason for that Annulment was something like mages meeting their families; especially given the fact the Templars involved haven't had a chance to defend themselves.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers.  Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

Rivain is a nation divided between Qunari, Traditionalists and Chantry faithful. The Circle is said to have been mostly a front to appease the Chantry but it was still a Circle which means that, as an institution, it was affiliated with the Chantry and subject to its laws, one of which happens to be the Right of Annulment.

Also, given that Rivain is a patchwork of cultures, two of them hostile to magic, I'd say the love for these Seers is not universal and if the presence of love is evidence of Seers doing good, then the absence of it in 2 out of 3 cultures that form Rivain must be evidence of Seers doing harm.

You sure like making assumptions about a culture where mages aren't branded as evil.Seers were said to be highly respected and the Rivaini turned to them for help,that does'nt sound sound like the propoganda you're spouting.

Also I did'nt miss your little quip that suggested I was ignorant about what happened to the Rivaini mages and Seers.I did my research when I first heard about the ROA in Rivain and the Codex entry says one of the key reasons why the templars were there was because the Seers and Rivaini mages were in contact with their families.The Seers being possessed was a known fact but the Chantry hates it when mages are given outside contact and they start to miss their families.

But hey I guess hundreds of men,women,and children being massacred because of such a petty reason is alright with you.The templars were clearly in the wrong for what happened in Rivain.

[Sol Downer]

Blood Magic is just a tool, like any other. Before anybody gets on my back by saying it only works when people are suffering, I'll remind them that a sword works the same way. Your sword doesn't really affect your opponent unless he's dying, right? So you cut him, stab him, or bash him in order to kill him...that doesn't make you evil. You're using a tool that has the ability to save your life, and others.

Modifié par Ultimashade, 02 octobre 2013 - 03:45 .

[Medhia Nox]

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.


@Ultima:  The mages of Thedas don't really know what magic is.  Stating it is a tool has no value unless you're a writer for Bioware.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 02 octobre 2013 - 04:17 .

[dragonflight288]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.


@Ultima:  The mages of Thedas don't really know what magic is.  Stating it is a tool has no value unless you're a writer for Bioware.

I recently played through Witch Hunt. Finn doesn't say he had a close relationship with his mother. He was talking about his really long name, and the dalish girl asked if his parents hated him for giving him that name, and he responded "No....I'm sure they love. In fact, I'm positive they loved me so much that their care overrode good sense."

[The Hierophant]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.

IIIRC Wilhelm was allowed to start a family outside of the circle with no mention of harrassment from the Templars. It seems that each branch of Templar have varying degrees of tolerance or leniency in regards to the rules.

[dragonflight288]

The Hierophant wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.

IIIRC Wilhelm was allowed to start a family outside of the circle with no mention of harrassment from the Templars. It seems that each branch of Templar have varying degrees of tolerance or leniency in regards to the rules.

He was given that privelage because he fought against Orlais in the war, and was given special exemption.

Most mages won't get that chance. If you play the mage origin, Duncan says only seven mages were sent to Ostagar, and we hear Gregoire complaining that the Circle sent so many already, and didn't want to send more than that.

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.

IIIRC Wilhelm was allowed to start a family outside of the circle with no mention of harrassment from the Templars. It seems that each branch of Templar have varying degrees of tolerance or leniency in regards to the rules.

He was given that privelage because he fought against Orlais in the war, and was given special exemption.

Most mages won't get that chance. If you play the mage origin, Duncan says only seven mages were sent to Ostagar, and we hear Gregoire complaining that the Circle sent so many already, and didn't want to send more than that.

His rights would have still been invalidated if the local Templar were ****s. Remember how Ser Rylock went againts the Wardens despite a conscription being issued?

[dragonflight288]

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.

IIIRC Wilhelm was allowed to start a family outside of the circle with no mention of harrassment from the Templars. It seems that each branch of Templar have varying degrees of tolerance or leniency in regards to the rules.

He was given that privelage because he fought against Orlais in the war, and was given special exemption.

Most mages won't get that chance. If you play the mage origin, Duncan says only seven mages were sent to Ostagar, and we hear Gregoire complaining that the Circle sent so many already, and didn't want to send more than that.

His rights would have still been invalidated if the local Templar were ****s. Remember how Ser Rylock went againts the Wardens despite a conscription being issued?

Not true. The crown has more authority than the Chantry.

Ser Rylock was overstepping her own authority. The Chantry and all the nations of Thedas have a treaty with the Wardens that makes Wardens untouchable. Rylock specifically said that the Chantry overruled the crown, but she had to act in secret because what she was doing was illegal.

Once Anders was conscripted, he was beyond the Chantry's legal authority.

Unless there are no credible witnesses, of course.

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.

IIIRC Wilhelm was allowed to start a family outside of the circle with no mention of harrassment from the Templars. It seems that each branch of Templar have varying degrees of tolerance or leniency in regards to the rules.

He was given that privelage because he fought against Orlais in the war, and was given special exemption.

Most mages won't get that chance. If you play the mage origin, Duncan says only seven mages were sent to Ostagar, and we hear Gregoire complaining that the Circle sent so many already, and didn't want to send more than that.

His rights would have still been invalidated if the local Templar were ****s. Remember how Ser Rylock went againts the Wardens despite a conscription being issued?

Not true. The crown has more authority than the Chantry.

Ser Rylock was overstepping her own authority. The Chantry and all the nations of Thedas have a treaty with the Wardens that makes Wardens untouchable. Rylock specifically said that the Chantry overruled the crown, but she had to act in secret because what she was doing was illegal.

Once Anders was conscripted, he was beyond the Chantry's legal authority.

Unless there are no credible witnesses, of course.

So what? In regards to their believed Maker given authority over mages some members of the Templar order have been shown to stand against and challenge the national or local leaders's authority. It doesn't change the fact that Rylock challenged the Arl of Amaranthine who happpened to be a Warden Commander, then there's Meredith with the previous viscount.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 02 octobre 2013 - 04:50 .

[cjones91]

@Hierophant Rylock and Meredith were extremists who believed they were above any authority.Meredith even broke one of her vows as a Templar when she started killing anyone who opposed her and refused to give up power,

[dragonflight288]

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones91: And yet, I wonder what allowed Finn from Witch Hunt to freely have a "very close relationship with his parents".

I'll also add that I'm not saying they DIDN'T attack because of their family relations.

IIIRC Wilhelm was allowed to start a family outside of the circle with no mention of harrassment from the Templars. It seems that each branch of Templar have varying degrees of tolerance or leniency in regards to the rules.

He was given that privelage because he fought against Orlais in the war, and was given special exemption.

Most mages won't get that chance. If you play the mage origin, Duncan says only seven mages were sent to Ostagar, and we hear Gregoire complaining that the Circle sent so many already, and didn't want to send more than that.

His rights would have still been invalidated if the local Templar were ****s. Remember how Ser Rylock went againts the Wardens despite a conscription being issued?

Not true. The crown has more authority than the Chantry.

Ser Rylock was overstepping her own authority. The Chantry and all the nations of Thedas have a treaty with the Wardens that makes Wardens untouchable. Rylock specifically said that the Chantry overruled the crown, but she had to act in secret because what she was doing was illegal.

Once Anders was conscripted, he was beyond the Chantry's legal authority.

Unless there are no credible witnesses, of course.

So what? In regards to their believed Maker given authority over mages some members of the Templar order have been shown to stand against and challenge the national or local leaders's authority. It doesn't change the fact that Rylock challenged the Arl of Amaranthine who happpened to be a Warden Commander, then there's Meredith with the previous viscount.

And that is exactly the wrong thing to do for the tempars. The templars duty is to protect the mages from the world as well as protect the world from mages. Politics is not part of that. The Chantry has a treaty, made after the third blight, that gives all Grey Wardens complete neutrality.

The Crown of various countries, allow the Chantry to be there at their own discretion. In Stolen Throne, Loghain and Maric were literally a hair away from kicking the Chantry out of Ferelden entirely because it was seen as more of an Orlesian organization rather than a religious one.

The templars couldn't touch Wilhelm because he had been given speical exemption by the crown, and they shouldn't have been able to go near Anders because he became a Grey Warden. And Meredith had absolutely no business whatsoever with interfering with Marlowe Dumar's role as Viscount, nor did she have any authority or right to act as defacto Viscount in the absence of a ruler. The templars didn't take that role when Dumar's predecessor tried kicking out the templars, and was tried by Elthina and deposed.

The Chantry and the Templars simply don't have the authority or the right.

[The Hierophant]

cjones91 wrote...

@Hierophant Rylock and Meredith were extremists who believed they were above any authority.Meredith even broke one of her vows as a Templar when she started killing anyone who opposed her and refused to give up power,

That's my point. Wilhelm (free mage with family) was lucky that the Ferelden Templar order of his time were majorly lenient in regards to their perceived Maker given authority over mages or else he would have been assassinated by the Temps instead of Shale.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 02 octobre 2013 - 05:26 .

[The Hierophant]

double post

Modifié par The Hierophant, 02 octobre 2013 - 05:03 .

[dragonflight288]

The Hierophant wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

@Hierophant Rylock and Meredith were extremists who believed they were above any authority.Meredith even broke one of her vows as a Templar when she started killing anyone who opposed her and refused to give up power,

That's my point. Wilhelm (free mage with family) was lucky that the Ferelden Templar order of his time were majorly lenient in regards to their perceived Mker given authority over mages or else he would have been assassinated by the Temps instead of Shale.

Ferelden is considered one of the most liberal Circle's. Most Circle's aren't like that.

[cjones91]

The Hierophant wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

@Hierophant Rylock and Meredith were extremists who believed they were above any authority.Meredith even broke one of her vows as a Templar when she started killing anyone who opposed her and refused to give up power,

That's my point. Wilhelm (free mage with family) was lucky that the Ferelden Templar order of his time were majorly lenient in regards to their perceived Mker given authority over mages or else he would have been assassinated by the Temps instead of Shale.

Whose to say some did'nt try?I would think twice about attacking a mage who has a golem at his side,however some templars are deluded enough to do so.

[Medhia Nox]

@dragonflight288: Though we were "shown" Kirkwall's circle.. and have places like Rivain.

Where does it say that Ferelden's circle is not the norm and that the norm is psychotic Templars abusing their power?

Yes 2/1 is technically an overabundance of abuse.

BUT - I will say, look what happened at the liberal Ferelden circle. Uldred.

NOT a good case for temperance.

And now the idiot mages have declared a rebellion.

I don't expect my Mage Inquisitor will get much love from his rebel colleagues.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 02 octobre 2013 - 05:06 .

[Aremce]

I made most of my DA-characters support mages but condemn blood magic, since it's dangerous and offers so much potential for abuse. Also, blood mages are the very reason why mages are feared and despised by the majority. Without it, mages would be in a far better position to really archieve their freedom. So ... in my opinion blood magic is a bad thing and blood mages are either evil, stupid or weak in personality and should just be killed before they get too powerfull and/or become abominations.

But I can also understand what drives mages to turn to blood magic and that it's not a "black and white" thing. The whole mage-topic sure is very, very controversial ...

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

@Hierophant Rylock and Meredith were extremists who believed they were above any authority.Meredith even broke one of her vows as a Templar when she started killing anyone who opposed her and refused to give up power,

That's my point. Wilhelm (free mage with family) was lucky that the Ferelden Templar order of his time were majorly lenient in regards to their perceived Mker given authority over mages or else he would have been assassinated by the Temps instead of Shale.

Ferelden is considered one of the most liberal Circle's. Most Circle's aren't like that.

Exactly. If the Circle of Dairsmund was protected by royal decree, the Seekers might have hesitated in Annuling the Circle in an effort to prevent a three way battle with the Monarchy and the Qun. The Dairsmund situation seemed out of whack as the Seers used the Circle as a front to placate the Chantry but were breaking the law they had accepted, while the Seekers overreacted as the children and men shouldn't have been killed as the abominations by seer tradition were only mature women.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 02 octobre 2013 - 05:22 .

[dragonflight288]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@dragonflight288: Though we were "shown" Kirkwall's circle.. and have places like Rivain.

Where does it say that Ferelden's circle is not the norm and that the norm is psychotic Templars abusing their power?

Yes 2/1 is technically an overabundance of abuse.

BUT - I will say, look what happened at the liberal Ferelden circle. Uldred.

NOT a good case for temperance.

And now the idiot mages have declared a rebellion.

I don't expect my Mage Inquisitor will get much love from his rebel colleagues.

Ferelden being liberal is acknowledged by the devs. And Ferelden still had plenty of templar abuse...it was just much more controlled because Gregoire held his templars accountable.

Rivain never fully converted, and its society actually embraced their mages, including the practice of their seers willingly allowing themselves to get possessed. Whether or not they are possessed by demons or spirits of various virtues is not really stated. It was only after the Chantry came in that tensions rose, and it wasn't between mage vs nonmage, but chantry vs everyone else.

As for Uldred, I won't defend him or his supporters, but the Circle was about to ally with Loghain until Wynne came back and told Irving that Loghain fled the battlefield, but you have plenty of mages left over who aren't like that.

As a way to add some humor, and another angle to the discussion, I'm going to quote those gossipy mages in Witch Hunt, "After what happened here, the Chantry has gotten really tense and is cracking down in other circles." "Everyone's a critique."

But offically, the mages didn't declare a rebllion. They voted for independence from the Chantry. The Chantry decided to let them leave, but the Seekers and Templars didn't want that, and Lambert declared the Nevarran Accord to be void an then the templars left the Chantry to hunt mages.