I don't know, because of how it described them, it gave me the feeling that this law did not apply to them.
also never delved into that law, which means what causes more narrative intrigue, is too much to personal interpretation.
I mean look at warhammer, it's interesting but it's horrible for mortals and anyone without power
Here is it as currently written in the latest writeup:
Law: Narrative Satisfaction. All laws of reality may be broken and bent for the purpose of narratively satisfying outcomes or for the pure of heart and will.
And here it is as I originally authored it:
The Grand Law of Narrative Satisfaction - The laws of reality are not absolute, and can be bent or defied either to suit grand enough narratively satisfactory outcomes or in the presence of a sufficiently strong display of pure will and pure heart. (Cosmic Act)
It's not meant to be a pure reality warping power that events will happen in a given way. It doesn't mean all events will happen like it's a story. It doesn't
start or
cause narrative events.
The first version ensures that if the only thing standing in the way of a narratively satisfying outcome is some pesky rule like the law of physics, said law can be ignored to ensure that the final outcome happens in a way that's satisfactory from a narrative outcome.
Like say the narratively satisfactory outcome of a story would be a hero slaying the villain, but to reach the villain the hero has to leap further than gravity would allow. By this law, the hero could leap far enough to reach the villain, slay the villain, and end the story on a satisfactory note. What it doesn't say is that the villain will suddenly die out of nowhere in order to ensure that good wins.
The second version is effectively 'heroic willpower' or 'villainous willpower'. If you're a pure individual and you express strong enough will, you can project that will into acts that would defy the laws of reality. An individual of pure evil could will himself not to die even if he should be dead. A hero of pure good could will himself to defy gravity. An individual of pure love could will himself to shout loud enough to call out to his beloved who would otherwise just be beyond reach (
which might also satisfy the first version).
What it doesn't do, however, it allow someone to say, will a hamburger into existence out of thin air, or kill someone just by wishing it so.
There's also the consideration that it doesn't lean towards good or evil. The first version only ensures a narratively satisfactory outcome - but doesn't specify whether the outcome is a good or bad one.
The custodian situation, for example - Imagine an narrative outcome where we - the makers - first create the Custodians. Then we create these 'outer gods'. The 'outer gods' then drive the Custodians to distrust us. As result, the Custodians turn on us, secretly plotting to allow the 'outer gods' to destroy us, and then successfully destroying both the makers and the outer gods while those two parties are weakening each other. The Custodians then take the Makers place.
For
us, this would be a bad outcome. But from an outside perspective, it would be a
narratively satisfactory outcome in a story about the maker's hubris and the Custodians as protagonists who overthrow their irresponsible creators to institute a better reign over the universe.
In other words, if you set up the right narrative,
the law of narrative satisfaction would enable our own destruction if we are careless about such things.
Honestly though, the Might of the OutSlayer sounds like a cooler and more mythical version of the Sacred Gear from Highschool DxD, and a version that actually works against gods (looking at you, Longinus). I would say to give out multiple versions of the Might of the OutSlayer (twelve in all) to other mortals, with the Hero being the first, but that can be done later in the future.
Also, you've freed up space for my Lizardmen race!
You're welcome!
And one of the elements I put in place for the '
Might of the OutSlayer' concept is that there indeed can be future wielders of the power, and that future versions could be tailored to specific threats as they come up.
In some ways, I think more to the Arbiter from the Halo franchise in the role the individual takes on, though without the expectation that the wielder is intended to die but rather gets the enjoy the rewards of the power after the threat is neutralized, and then the power goes back away until it's needed again.
