If you started a what if scenario where a main character sacrificing himself to kill the bad guy doesn't happen (they both survive that by the way) leads to major consequences. But would it be pointless if the main character ends up dying later down the line (possibly because of those consequences), would the whole thing be pointless?
Spoilers for Force Awakens, I guess. Spoiler If I understand you, then this is your scenario: Finn decides to heroically sacrifice himself by flying into El Cannon Gigantico, but due to circumstances beyond his control, he's knocked clean out of the way. El Cannon Gigantico remains undestroyed, and Finn remains unsacrificed. Later, in a mostly related situation, Finn dies of, say, tetanus. Or pneumonia. Or something stupid, because of a minor injury sustained during the knocking-out-of-the-way. Do I have that right? In that case, Finn's theoretical sacrifice isn't rendered meaningless just because he survives. He was still willing to theoretically sacrifice himself. Dying of tetanus is an unfortunate (and unheroic, and possibly ironic) event, but it doesn't render the previous attempted sacrifice 'meaningless'. Either that, or I've grossly misunderstood some part of this.
That depends on the circumstances. Really need more information to say for sure. Generally speaking, no, it wouldn't necessarily be pointless- it could be done.
It could be a good way to toy with the readers' emotions, as long as it is done well. They'll have all the build up and emotional force behind the initial sacrifice, the relief when it doesn't happen, then it can hit even harder when the character they thought was safe is suddenly taken away from them. You'll have that moment when the realisation hits that they are going to die anyway in a way that is much more out of their control than the initial sacrifice (which was more of a heroic choice than just cold pointless death - though as others have said, that doesn't make it meaningless). I think you just have to be careful not to make it feel cheap - there was another thread posted recently talking about how sometimes not drawing a death scene out can actually make it hit harder because the reader becomes desensitised if it goes on too long (sorry I can't remember who said this but if I find the thread I will credit the member properly!) Edit: I think I was thinking of a comment by @Kallisto on the thread 'what if your protagonist dies?!'. If anyone else has said something similar please feel free to let me know!
On the contrary, I'd find it boring if everything worked out as planned, because that would feel like repetition.
That sounds like The Last Jedi but yeah. I always saw it like this. The Would-Be sacrificer fails to sacrifice himself to kill the bad guy to stop him from starting a zombie apocalypse (turning things from bad to a lot worse). Allowing the bad guy to unleash the zombies, and those zombies end up killing him.
That would make a lot of stories pointless. Macbath, Joan of Arc. I think what makes a story is pointless is that there's no lesson for people or nothing that makes you think or question things. I like the idea of the hero failing/dying because it's going against the rules. Everyone has this idea that you can't really kill off your main character, but if you foreshadowed it at the beginning. You could have your hero be famous all ready, like Hercules, and maybe a prophecy is given to him by a blind witch who can see the future. He is destined to die but save the planet from a great evil. Or have him have visions of his own death and in trying to prevent that death he only succeed in making it happen. It doesn't matter what he does because his life has been pre-destined. That could be interesting because I think most people like to think they have control over their lives.
Depends on what's the full story. If Sherlock falls off a cliff with Moriarty in order to kill his worst enemy but then reappears in the next chapter, then great. More adventures follow. Maybe Sherlock eventually dies in another adventure. That makes sense but depends what the book is about. If your book seems like two stories stitched together, first one is Sherlock kills off Moriarty then returns for second adventure, but the second adventure doesn't go anywhere because Sherlock dies of pneumonia (or is shot by Moriarty's wife), then your reader will hate that book. But if your book is about Dr Watson telling the life story of Sherlock Holmes, then the story makes perfect sense because it tells us exactly what it says on the tin - the life story of Sherlock.
Something like that might work, but NOT for the MC just because his death would be pointless (regardless of he tried or not to sacrifice himself before). The MC needs to have a "good" death. It could be in a sacrifice or dying in peace when everything has been resolved. But you can do this: The character who dies instead of being the MC he could be someone important, like a friend. Then this character tries to sacrifice himself but his attempt it´s ruined by the MC, then the character sacrifies himself in order to save his friends (including the MC), then the MC feels guilty and that could give the MC a character arc.
