In this world, there are mortals (human beings) and divine beings (gods/goddess). The gods and goddess have personalities, limitations, and what is commonly called "human nature" (they don't know everything, they screw up, etc.), with one rather notable exception: Whatever their particular "area" is, they are good at it and by nature avoid, abhor, and have no inclination towards the associated vice. So, for example, a goddess of wisdom would make very thoughtful and wise decisions (though that doesn't always mean the "right" ones, as the gods are limited by what they know and don't know, etc.) and would be very unlikely to do anything that would be foolish given what she knows at any given time, because being foolish is not in her nature.
My problem is that I have one of these gods (albeit one stuck in a powerless mortal form for the moment) as a part of my main cast. This one's area is "courage." So theoretically, this person would be naturally inclined to avoid doing anything cowardly, in fact, the cowardly thought processes that would lead to cowardly behavior wouldn't occur for them. Cowardice is not an option. (Also, since "courage" is the balance between cowardice and recklessness, then theoretically reckless behavior should be off the table as well?) I've realized that, practically speaking, this would mean: No avoiding problems or pretending they don't exist because they scare you. No being dishonest with other people out of fear they will judge you. No running away from your problems at all, really. And what is it interesting characters seem to do a LOT? Avoid problems, pretend they don't exist, run away from them before later on in the story realizing they need to step up and face them anyway.
Can a character with no inclination towards any form of cowardice still be a well-rounded character who does interesting things within the plot, instead of a boring/annoying goody-two-shoes? Or have I eliminated far too large a source of character flaws and mistakes to recover from?
I had considered making cowardice their only antithesis, and giving them an inclination towards recklessness as a result, but I'm not sure I like the gimick-y way that could turn out, or the kind of person said character would be in that instance.
Edit: To potentially help those forming answers, here is a definition of the virtue of "courage": miriam webster defines courage as "mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty" and google search of the definition results in "the ability to do something that frightens one" or "strength in the face of pain or grief."