When I had my brief stint as a fort, I talked to a few fort imms about the Marans. Also, I think it may be addressed in their help section (not sure).

Essentially, don't cross the line between killing evil and becoming evil yourself. And be a badass rper/pker. That's the impression I got.

"How do you know said storm giant was killed after Padraig died? Maybe Istdinen healed it?"

Do you justify killing an evil while hurting another good? Is it fine to burn another good to a crisp, a few times, and tell them later "oh, I'm sorry, I was going after weakass evil." Certainly Istdinen could've done better, and maybe he did, but I think what he did was technically appropriate (ie healing the elf takes priority over healing the storm).

It's not even a fort/tribunal disruption. It's an elite storm giant, part of the army in Kiadana attacking the evil fire giants, being harmed because 'he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and apparently too stupid to move. How does a goodie treat that? In fact, why not go kill that paladin east of Arkham, take his cursed sword, with the reason of 'the paladin is immortal, he'll come back anyways, and this sword will help me kill evils all the more swiftly.'

I'm just saying that there are certain attributes that are almost key to being a maran, or at the least, a fortress. Kinda like how ragers shouldn't use magic, outlanders shouldn't use coppers.

Everyone has their own opinion of the dilemma of what's proper or not. You can give a reason to everything, but it should be a good logical one, instead of a weakass one just to justify something. "RP justifies everything" I agree, but if you have a goal in mind, try not to do something that appears or actually is contradictory to that goal.

Heck, maybe we'll find out in the invoker's role that he lamented after attacking the good. Something about blood frenzy or something. However, at this point, upon looking at the log, I think it's easy to criticize what the invoker did.