I think it's important to distinguish between failing a roll requiring a change of tactic, versus it causing a total failure of a mission.
Like, if I fail a persuade check, and go into combat, that's not a big deal. But when I fail to save the child in the Druid encampment - or the dude in the burning building - I savescum over and over again.
While it's real to life, it's just bad game design to allow a roll on something which invariably causes a critical mission failure with no ability for the player to consider alternate paths. Games are supposed to be enjoyable and give you a sense of agency - not make life feel futile and you feel like a piece of crap for being completely irrelevant.
I've seen several people mention this about saving the tiefling girl. I've succeeded at saving her 1 time in 4 so far. Someone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but I think the only thing that I got from saving her was a very minor amount of gold from the parents, like 50g or something. It certainly wasn't anything amazing or even relevant or I would remember it better. It's certainly not a vital thing to do and in fact, the deck is stacked against you succeeding at it. I cannot understand why anyone would waste their time reloading the game over that.
The guy pinned under the timber in Waukeen's Rest is the same way. My current playthrough I succeeded in saving him (which is funny because I didn't even go in the room where he is at) and I got nothing. I may have gotten some xp, didn't notice. I wouldn't even have known I'd saved him except I noticed it in the quest log when I was looking for something else.
Both of those are side quests and minor ones at that. You're really not missing out on anything if you fail the rolls. The things that are integral to the main plot usually have very low DCs and/or let you re-roll if you fail or even better, you can use the parasite to make it where you are unable to fail by lowering the DC to 1.
