> That said, I also don't think Paladins are right for Maran
>either....It is my own personal belief that if you combine
>Maran philosophy with a paladin.....and stir...you get a
>Goodie Shaman. I just see too much over-lap between Maran
>paladin and goodie shaman, and I would like those two roles
>and guilds to be more unique and seperate)

First, I'll address the tribunal pally thoughts and move on to the Maran pally. If I were to personally play a hard-nosed paladin in tribunal, I would not hesitate to attack *any* evil outside of protected cities, fellow tribunal or not. I would not buddy up with them, I would not retrieve along side them. I would likely catch hell from the people running tribunal, but I'd deal with that then. I don't think you'd even need to go that far, just so long as you weren't friendly/helpful to them. Just because you both enforce the law, does not mean you are associating with evil. The law isn't evil, and if you aren't helping him, then neither are you. That'd be similar to saying, well, that fire giant over there favors swords, so from now on I will only use maces, because I don't want to be even remotely associated with evil.

As far as Maran or MARAN pallys go, you *don't* have to attack evils in town if your paladin thinks it would be wrong. For example, I could say I felt it would be doing a greater diservice to light to not have patience and simply wait for him to leave town and not cause the chaos of battle in the city streets, and I think you'd be fine. (I'm only addressing the 9th rule since I think that is the one you have a problem with concerning maran + pally) I think I could also get away with saying that I felt by eliminating the evil within the city walls, I would only be aiding the laws of that city and those imposing them, by removing the threat, and if a tribunal took offense, once my duty was done, I would turn myself in...to the first good aligned trib I saw.

Paladins, like every other class, are not meant to be all played the exact same. The way the code was explained to me when the changes first went in with paladins, was that a paladin wasn't expected to keep every tenant of the same level. Certain paladins would take certain parts to it to heart more than other aspects, while still adhereing to all of it. Different religions/races/spheres/dedications/cabals are going to invariably create a multitude of different paladin personalities.