Of course, there's also some stuff I like about it: <...>

over time I've begun valuing execution over idea more and more.



A commendable attitude, one that I share. But I would like to point out that "properly executing" a worldbuilding idea requires that this concept doesn't exist in a vacuum, like it currently does to me, the random passerby of your deviantart - it requires to be inside a bigger world. Maybe you already have it in your head, which allows for you to add more nuance to this? but I don't have access to that information. And as far as ideas in a relative vacuum go, I say this is a good one.



EDIT: Wait. Aitia, that came up here before. Huh. Anyway, I don't follow you for long enough to know much about it, though - I will have to apologize for my ignorance, if there is something you posted before about that world but I didn't see.

Sorry I took a while to reply. This type of walllike post demands of me to spend an equal time thinking and replying to it, I just couldn't do with anything less. Hopefully my less-coherent-than-usual stream of thought will make sense to you.1) It's okay to skim over things like that, especially in the first iterations of a concept. Very often I found that better, more interesting explanations for a thing come after you try to tie a concept into a larger story - which doesn't seem to be the case here.2) This point would hinge on whether you want the villain to only be a driving force behind the conflict - basically a background for more interesting character/plot/whatever interactions - or you actually want them to become a character. In the latter case, yes, I can see your point, and also why you seem dissatisfied with the "demon" being too simple an explanation. But in the former case... Think Avatar and Ozai. Ozai is a very flat character (if you can look past the fact he is voiced by Mark fkn Hamill), and yet it's perfectly fine, because Avatar is a story about Aang and co, about Zuko vs Azula, about so many other characters embroiled in the war Ozai perpetuates.3) Have to agree on this one. Huh. It's actually a nice point, I should remember it in case I ever try anything like this myself.4) Well, you basically fixed that yourself.Although this point makes me wonder......It could feed into developing some character for how or versus Arlyte was before his banishment. Maybe he was always manipulative? Or maybe he was opposite, and it was this banishment that taught him patience?5) Actually, one point I completely disagree with. I used to think this way when making my own stories, but as I grow older, I realize that people really are stupid, and definitely can be made even more stupidly stupid by greed. If you say that the first people who tried to make coins out of the sap were just seeking to profit from it, it really does make perfect sense.In a side note, I believe comparing it to "villian gloating" is incorrect. A villian is a singular, particular person - they either do this stupid thing or don't; but golden sap was a temptation spread over time, and offered to many people.would eventually take the bait, it's statistics.Yes, basically what I meant by my original post! Okay, the first two of those, at least. I actually missed the third (to my crying shame!) so I am glad you pointed it out.>