Apparition in the Woods
I'm not much a fan of killing off a character without good reason... or a level of flash on par with a bomb set off in a tanker full of fireworks. Really, if I'm going to remove a character from any potential future use, I want to make the most of that elimination.
This said, if Never Found the Body comes up, it's not likely to be subverted; considering that the few times I've used it have all applied to really nasty characters, this is not generally a good thing for the rest of the cast.
I'll hide your name inside a word and paint your eyes with false perception.
Short Hair
If you put your characters in a dangerous situation or a dangerous environment, it's unrealistic for them not to die. Death is also a way to bring home to the reader just how dangerous the situation or the environment is. You don't want to kill everybody, and you don't want to make it gratuitous, but some writerly murder can help your story.
And face it, some characters deserve it.
Under World. It rocks!
This foreboding is fa...
For me, any character that's going to die has been marked for it almost from the start.
It's practically one of the first questions I ask about them, even unconciously- "Is this character going to die?" It's never a surprise.
edited 23rd Jun '11 6:04:11 PM by deathjavu
Look, you can't make me speak in a logical, coherent, intelligent bananna.
Well I've found that when you plan out your stories more (something I am doing more now), killing off characters becomes less of an issue. You're always going for some kind of effect or plot significance or something, so the more planned out your story, the less it becomes "Oh no I should kill someone off" and more, okay I know this character is going to die because I want this to seriously affect my other character's psychological well being. For this, I want it to be a senseless bloody combat death with no last words to make it really poignant how war can kill anybody.
The more you plan, the less it feels like you are "killing off" characters rather it just being good plot.
Runs on Awesomeness
I don't like killing characters. If I do, it's mostly a You Have Outlived Your Usefulness thing on my part. Take my last story, for instance: I had a pair of twins for some Fanservice tropes, but other than that they never really got characterized well. So I killed one off and used that to fuel some Character Development for the other. It also provided the Moral Event Horizon for one of the villains.
I'm generally more inclined to kill villains, since they don't tend to come back for a sequel :P
No one believes me when I say angels can turn their panties into guns.
Trans Siberian Anarchestra (it/they)
Sailing the Skies!
@Javu: That is pretty much how I approach character death, actually. I avoid killing people off gratuitously, but if I plan for someone to die, and I can make it so that what causes their death is believable, then they can die.
edited 29th Jun '11 2:58:26 PM by Alfric
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/lb_i.php?lb_id=13239183440B34964700 Alfric's Fire Emblem Liveblog Encyclopedia!
I don't like to kill off characters, but I try to do so anyway because it's necessary to set up certain characters. If a particular guy is supposed to be a ruthless killer, I have to make him kill someone, preferably someone with enough characterization that the audience will care. But since I pretty much completely avert Death Is Cheap (even one character who they Never Found the Body will stay dead) killing someone means I can't use them in future stories, even if I like them and find them interesting. So I'm often reluctant to kill certain characters.
Right now I'm running into trouble with a conflict between two groups of well-characterized characters that I'm quite attached to, and who will definitely not be willing to let each other live. I'm not sure how long I can keep both groups alive without their Plot Armor becoming too obvious, but I really don't want to let either group kill the other.
If I'm asking for advice on a story idea, don't tell me it can't be done.