Without the risk of character death, D&D is no fun. Period.
At least to me. Maybe not to you or MoogieEmpMog. Different styles.
You obviously enjoy a tactical game, though, so I assume that risk of character death is part of the "tactical risk" in that game. Otherwise it's just a marilith-killing romp through the park with your friends every weekend. If "Save or Die" breaks your definition of "acceptable risk" then that's one thing. It doesn't break mine, though.
Look -- I lost 10 PCs in the last campaign I played in, a very nitty-gritty tactical campaign with lots of complicated fights, and I had a blast. When I died, every six months or so, I would just resume playing the next session with a new character one level below my dead character. If you prefer playing "perpetual character building" games where your character is never any serious risk of dying because you are so attached to them, then enjoy. It's not the kind of D&D I like to play and I want the rules to support the kind of D&D I like to play because I enjoy dramatic, grim, bloody, "everpresent risk of death" campaign styles. And yes, we got robbed by bandits, thrown in jail, had our magic items broken, and all the other non-death styles of losing too. I like the chaos. I like the risk. I like creating new characters. If you don't, you enjoy your kind of D&D game, and I will enjoy my kind of D&D game.
Imagine how much more fun you could have had if you hadn't lost those 10 PCs. It just takes a little willingness to embrace change. Not much at all. Yes, I know change can be scary, but it can bring huge rewards.
When I died, every six months or so, I would just resume playing the next session with a new character one level below my dead character. If you prefer playing "perpetual character building" games where your character is never any serious risk of dying because you are so attached to them, then enjoy.
Wait a moment. You spent all that time creating PCs, and you can't spend just a little time refashioning your paradigm? Have D&D players gone all soft or something?
It's not the kind of D&D I like to play and I want the rules to support the kind of D&D I like to play because I enjoy dramatic, grim, bloody, "everpresent risk of death" campaign styles.
Imagine how much more fun you could have had if you hadn't lost those 10 PCs. It just takes a little willingness to embrace change. Not much at all. Yes, I know change can be scary, but it can bring huge rewards.
Also, it may be a good idea to run a Warhammer type of a game for a change, where dying is not likely (t least until you run out of Fate Points), but your characters can be assaulted in many inventive ways (crippling, tainting, insanity, poverty to name a few general examples).
Risking character's death is not the only way to play for high stakes.
Wait a moment. You spent all that time creating PCs, and you can't spend just a little time refashioning your paradigm? Have D&D players gone all soft or something?
"No Death" does not equal "No Consequence From Failure"
Have horrible things happen to other people; have friends and family mercilessly slaughtered. Have the PC's home town obliterated. Have the PC's spouce/lover/whatever fall in love with the main villain (that will mess with their head). There are so many bad things that can happen that can't be fixed with a single spell (Raise Dead) and each of them opens up multiple new plot hooks. Sometimes having the bad thing happen to someone else will be more effective. Killing off a beloved NPC might hurt more than killing off a PC.
