I am not buying "consequences". The game is too rng dependent and a single critical hit is enough for your character with full hp to die.
I prefer much less irritating gameplay than some "consequences".
A single crit isn't enough for your character with full hp to die though, at least past level 1 or 2. No matter how much damage you take, as long as you're not taken to your negative max HP in a single hit, characters in 5e don't die outright. And once unconscious, it takes at least two hits to actually kill them which provides time to stabilize or heal them.
I agree that BG3 is fairly rng dependent, especially with it's enemy AI and enemies being given multiattack. But I'd prefer that the AI to not target downed characters on easier difficulties over eliminating the ability to stabilize downed characters. Then you'll have 2-5 full turns to stabilize (or heal) an ally if they don't stabilize by themselves.
Having the option to stabilize fallen characters strictly makes the game less irritating, assuming all other things are left the same.
In my opinion, it would be better to give it up.
If the characters would automatically get up after the end of the fight, it would have solved a lot of problems.
You don't have to give the player so many ways to revive a character, which makes no sense for teams at such a low level. It also solves the plot holes why, in the case of our characters, the tadpoles do not want to leave the host.
The need to stabilize the fallen companions adds absolutely nothing to the game if they don't get back into the fight. At most it makes it more annoying.
The scrolls could still be useful to lift characters during fights, allowing them to return to the combat.
In patch 4, Flind was able to almost take down my bear druid.
With one blow she threw my character out of the form (full hp) and gave additional damage to the character. So one crit is enough to exclude the character from the fight.
