this might be a contrived/simplistic way to phrase it but:

maybe you can imagine there being
“heroes of narrative worlds”
and
“heroes of natural worlds”
and both/things in between

narrative worlds are environments one finds themselves in where matter and energy are reallocated in ways that can often be most simply expressed in terms of intents, politics, social dynamics, psychic forces, memory, etc

and natural worlds are ones where narratives theologies myths social dynamics politics etc don’t apply - just the unknown and known laws of physics of that system

heroes of worlds leaning narrative require charisma, cooperation, dignity, honor, etc

and heroes of worlds leaning nature demand agentic curiosity investigation survival vigilance caution open mindedness inventiveness etc

(again, over simplifying)

you’d like to be a hero of both because there’s always nature somewhere - and when you’re in nature, it can always be more narrative (and that’s not bad, it just means default nature can be transformed into civilization culture art beauty minds complexity etc)

if you’re a hero of narrative only then you die, basically - because nature is still building up irony to attack you with paperclips from some rando material science nanobot discovery that was written off because the whole shock is so banal and meaningless and poorly written - but it’s possible nonetheless, it’s there even if you don’t look

and a hero of nature only never really pushes what’s “true” into “what could be true” hard enough - it just reveals There’s More To Explore