Charles Phipps wrote:
As a general rule, I look at change as positive whenever it adds to the universe and negative whenever it takes away. I'm not necessarilly opposed to the deaths of characters but I think it should be only when there's either no more stories to be told with said characters or the death results in a better story than anything else which could have been done with them. Which is, honestly, an unreasonably tall order for an author to fulfill.
I think they did it with the Borg, though, which is a big accomplishment.
It depends - if it is done for story driven dramatic purposes there will be a point. There will be a plot with structure that utilises it.
It can also be done more in a 'reflecting real life' way, unexpected, senseless, pointless and with no structured story point. Which is not to say that there will not be story opportunities and developments spun off from it.
Which is more realistic - character 'X' sacrificing themselves heroically to save the ship or dying from disease, accident or just being in the wrong place at the wrong time ?