Spoiler-ful advice to SE's Writing Team for Future Content.

[Arutan]

Why do lots of people feel like everyone is dying with Ysayle and Haurchefant, Moenbryda and Papalymo dead lmao, there's plenty other character alive and some other to come in SB. Within 4 year, 4 death is a pretty good ratio, 1/year.

[Vexander]

Well, the Scions feel like they took some hits for sure.

We lost Minfilia, Papalymo, and Yda. Arguably we lost Yda ages ago, but the reveal was pretty recent. This leaves us with Thancred and Y'shtola. Well, Urianger too, but he's such a background character its honestly not difficult to forget about him. At the least we've gained Alphinaud and Alisae in that time frame, but its starting to feel like the Scions are just going to end up answering to Papa Thancred and Mamma Y'shtola from now on, in terms of seniority and all. Krile was a nice addition but so far I'm not seeing them doing much for the MSQ, kind of just floating as a background character like Urianger, just with a bit more screentime.

Guess we'll see who bites the dust come Stormblood. I imagine we'll be losing quite a few characters. The only ones I imagine to have thick enough plot armor to survive now would be Thancred, Y'shtola, Alphinaud, and Alisae. I wouldn't be shocked if they killed Alphinaud -or- Alisae either, just to give the other more development.

Something else I'm thinking we might see is more permanent, long-lasting injuries. Like Thancred's compromised Aether, or how Rhauban lost an arm. Imagine Alphinaud in a Wheelchair or something for the rest of his life. I could see SE going that route.

[LineageRazor]

Personally, I think it's nice to know that the Scion's aren't untouchable. The Sultana's "miraculous" recovery felt really cheap to me, her assassination was tragic, but it was also very exciting to me. The fact that the plot basically said, "Just kidding!" and reset Ul'dah to the status quo was a big letdown. While I'm not looking for Game-of-Thrones-style levels of anyone-can-die, when SE DOES decide that the plot call for a character's death, I want that death to stick. It's hard to get emotionally invested in dangerous situations when I know that no matter what happens, everyone's going to pull through unscathed.

(For the record, though, I don't count Yda's death. Lyse is the only Yda I've ever known, so the revelation that Yda wasn't the "real" Yda wasn't very hard-hitting.)

[Kaitoo]

Im far more concered with the villiains dying tbh. before they are etablished

Im fine with the other deaths. Doesnt mean everyone was executed very well or something but im fed up with going against a world ending threat against something and nobody dies or one token character like in in most rpgs and especially mmorpgs

[JunseiKei]

Not killing of characters give a lot of needless characters Mary Sue vibes and gets super predictable.

They've killed off allies and villains a like. Not every villain needs to have a lot of screen time to make them more of a villain than they already are. Especially with the type of villains our character tends to get into tussles with: often leaders in positions of power; they're likely to be able to get away, taunting our hero or square off to fight to the death. Plus, the FFXIV is a multi-layered war- prepare for more deaths.

That being said, the only "villain" I can see genuinely lasting a while is the new emperor and Nero (since he's filling the trope of anti-hero).

[Naunet]

I think the death toll of named characters for 4 years (earth time) of constant war with primals, garleans and dragons is actually at a reasonable level.

It would be nice if they didn't kill off all of their actually interesting characters, leaving us with only the bland ones...

SE also has a bad habit of engaging in the act of "only give X character lots of development right before you kill them".

I don't like that the main emotional currency video game writers lean on involves killing off characters. Whenever I start to care about a character in a game, especially this one, I have to curb my investment because they're probably going to die.

Yes, yes, yes, yes. This so much! It's cheap. And then of course SE actually fails to follow through on the ONE death that would have had legitimate build up and emotional impact (Sultana) because they... what, got scared? But I guess it's easy for them to create female characters to kill off whenever they please to fuel cheap emotional ends.

...if you guys think this game is bad for killing people, I could scarcely see you guys even survive reading Game of Thrones, much less watch it.

Killing a character should be something given serious thought. It should never be used simply to up emotional stakes. I despise Song of Ice & Fire/Game of Thrones because it uses that play far too much (among other reasons). Good writing does not have to depend on character death to stoke the flames of reader/viewer emotion. Instead, character death should be a carefully considered tool given proper respect and delivered with precision. When your readers spend more time guessing "Who is going to die next?" instead of getting invested in the story, then you have made a huge mistake.

[LineageRazor]

Killing a character should be something given serious thought. It should never be used simply to up emotional stakes. I despise Song of Ice & Fire/Game of Thrones because it uses that play far too much (among other reasons). Good writing does not have to depend on character death to stoke the flames of reader/viewer emotion. Instead, character death should be a carefully considered tool given proper respect and delivered with precision. When your readers spend more time guessing "Who is going to die next?" instead of getting invested in the story, then you have made a huge mistake.

I wouldn't say that Game of Thrones is "careless," exactly. It simply tends to deconstruct a lot of the tropes that we've gotten far too used to in fiction. The fact that a person is an important character, or has built up a lot of potential, is not enough to save them when an enemy has them dead-to-rights. Nor is a character entitled to a blaze of glory - many of them die senseless and ignoble deaths. We've gotten far too reliant on narrow escapes and last-minute rescues, and the fact that these things rarely happen when they "should" is one of the reasons folks get so surprised when they read the series. The death toll in Game of Thrones is interesting not because it is high, but in that so many of those deaths are completely unpredictable from the standpoint of a modern reader of fiction.

Does this game need to go a similar path in order to be narratively sound? No. However, the Final Fantasy fanbase has matured to the point where we really shouldn't be seeing things like a character sacrificing themselves with a bomb (FFIV's Cid) only to miraculously survive. Don't play games with our hearts!

[Viridiana]

It took until 3.4 for Urianger to finally get some development since 1.0. 3.4!

I guess the end of Moenbryda doesn't count as development for Urianger, somehow?

[Jonnycbad]

That last guy to recently die ..... I never saw a corpse, and this is SE we're talking about. Anything's possible.

Just calling it....he'll be our NPC guide for the Interdimensional Rift, like Alisae was for BCoB.

[JunseiKei]

The Walking Dead comic is far worse for character deaths. Specifically the comic and not so much the show. The show as more plot armor on characters that prevent certain deaths. A couple of characters suffer from it in the comic, but not to the extent as the show.

I think the issue [that many people here have] is that the story needs a bunch of characters to get the story going as this is more world involved than other Final Fantasy titles. Sure, you might have a black smith that helps you out in a town on your quest. However, he's nameless and just otherwise goes back to making weapons because he's not special. There's no reason for him to have character development. Most other titles, it's just your band of merry men (and ladies) to save a world for a vastly powerless people. That isn't so much the case here in FFXIV; it's a power struggle with several characters willing to help our single Warrior of Light (also a huge difference- we have ONE Warrior of Light, not several). This means you need a large presence of characters to fill roles, but if you leave them in the limelight for too long, there is no development for them later. Or they can detract from the story.

Example: Urianger. Recently had a bit of character development, but had small instances along the way that are probably forgotten by most players. His character development was not a lot nor sudden, like Moenbryda.
Example: Alisae. Mostly vanished in 2.0 sans for dealing with the Coil of Bahamut- a sidequest tied to raids that many did not do because raids. Made a re-appearance in 3.0 in time for the Warriors of Darkness. Again, with the large stint in development, people probably think it's sudden. 2.0's Coil story actually set the record for her reappearance at a later date with a saying repeated by Moenbryda (or was it the other way around? Either or, it was an echo'd statement).
Example: Raubahn. Mainly a speculation thing here. His presence was very fleeting, as much as Merlwyb. At least Kan-E-Senna has the connection with the elementals to pull her in and make her relevant here and there. However, with his home coming into light, I expect to see far more of the Flame General. He had some character development near the start of 3.0, but it was quickly overshadowed and probably forgotten by most players.

Other characters had development in 1.0, but unless you played 1.0 or watched older player video uploads, you'd not know they existed and had established personalities and growths already.

Example: Lousoix (technically did not die until Final Coil, Turn 3), Minfilia, Thancred, Y'shtola, Yda and Papalymo.
Example: Edda. Yes. Edda from Tam-tara and Palace of the Dead. From what I remember, you had to persuade her from persuing the path of necromancy. This is completely gone from 2.0 until Tam-tara Hard Mode and fully brought back to the limelight in Palace of the Dead. It also completely makes more sense as to what the final boss says about Edda knowing she was originally going to pursue necromancy.

I just think most people have a hard time keeping track of things at large. The Scions mostly deal with primals and want to be neutral of the workings of other city-states. This means, by default, the Scion related characters will have limited screen time and bursts of relevancy or development that's brought to the fore. However, as the story progresses and Alphinaud's interests in politics rears it's head, I see the Scions steering away from "we do primals only" to "yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. Hydaelyn really needs us. Especially if we want to thwart the Ascians." Then again, I've always had this mentality with people saying things like "Squall is dead," "Why do only Sophie and Irvine remember the others?" or "FFX has time travel," "why did Tidus vanish?" or "Why can't we raise Aerith?"