There are a few things I disagree with but the scroll part is, IMO, a perfect solution and game mechanic. When you consider you are basically casting the spell on the scroll, infusing it with the magic of the spell, and reading the words unleashes the magic, it only makes sense that it would disappear. The magic is now gone from the piece of paper. Then when you consider resource management is a big part of the game (remember it was not a "role playing" game but an "adventure" game) the decision on whether you would use that fireball spell now and lose it (and maybe never find it again) or hope you survive the adventure so you can scribe it into your spell book and use it forever is a HUGE decision. BTW, this is also the same with wands, etc. Would you ever as a DM give out a wand of lightning bolts or magic missiles or paralyzation is they could use it an unlimited amount of times? Talk about making the game boring and repetitive.
I could go on but no need. Also, I am not a huge B/X fan, but more of a BECMI/RC fan and in those versions I think a few of the things you didn't like were fixed as you mentioned (but they also caused OTHER problems)
I won't go point by point, but I understand most of your gripes. However, I have often said "You can't 'fix' D&D." and a given edition's foibles and quirks are just part of it. I don't find most of these points to actually be a problem. Are some of them a product of BX's place in the evolution of the game (and TTRPGs in general)? Sure! Unlike AD&D, B/X is intended as a toolbox, not canon. I also suspected house ruling and cherry picking of rules is intended to be part of it. I confirmed this a few years ago in a conversation with Zeb Cook at Garycon. It's fine if you'd like your game to not be 100% BtB, but over the years I've found a lot of subtle elegance in some of these mechanics that I didn't originally notice.
Yeah, I always found it odd and contrived that spells would vanish from a scroll, or stranger still, from the caster's mind. And wands as disposable cameras is also disappointing. I think there's an expectation that players should be able to pick up lots of magical items, which makes it necessary to nerf them. At least Gamma World's ray guns have a relatable technical reason to have a limited number of charges.
So basically other than Vancian Casting, which is the best system ever conceived for promoting strategic thinking and decision making for casters, you complain that you chose B/X instead of BECMI, AD&D 2e or OSE Advanced Fantasy, where all these (often petty) gripes are fixed. (There are optional rules in 2e spells & magic for playing with spell points, but again I wouldn’t recommend it).
Your criticism is 50 years late and the points have already been adressed.
There are a few things I disagree with but the scroll part is, IMO, a perfect solution and game mechanic. When you consider you are basically casting the spell on the scroll, infusing it with the magic of the spell, and reading the words unleashes the magic, it only makes sense that it would disappear. The magic is now gone from the piece of paper. Then when you consider resource management is a big part of the game (remember it was not a "role playing" game but an "adventure" game) the decision on whether you would use that fireball spell now and lose it (and maybe never find it again) or hope you survive the adventure so you can scribe it into your spell book and use it forever is a HUGE decision. BTW, this is also the same with wands, etc. Would you ever as a DM give out a wand of lightning bolts or magic missiles or paralyzation is they could use it an unlimited amount of times? Talk about making the game boring and repetitive.
I could go on but no need. Also, I am not a huge B/X fan, but more of a BECMI/RC fan and in those versions I think a few of the things you didn't like were fixed as you mentioned (but they also caused OTHER problems)
I won't go point by point, but I understand most of your gripes. However, I have often said "You can't 'fix' D&D." and a given edition's foibles and quirks are just part of it. I don't find most of these points to actually be a problem. Are some of them a product of BX's place in the evolution of the game (and TTRPGs in general)? Sure! Unlike AD&D, B/X is intended as a toolbox, not canon. I also suspected house ruling and cherry picking of rules is intended to be part of it. I confirmed this a few years ago in a conversation with Zeb Cook at Garycon. It's fine if you'd like your game to not be 100% BtB, but over the years I've found a lot of subtle elegance in some of these mechanics that I didn't originally notice.
Yeah, I always found it odd and contrived that spells would vanish from a scroll, or stranger still, from the caster's mind. And wands as disposable cameras is also disappointing. I think there's an expectation that players should be able to pick up lots of magical items, which makes it necessary to nerf them. At least Gamma World's ray guns have a relatable technical reason to have a limited number of charges.
So basically other than Vancian Casting, which is the best system ever conceived for promoting strategic thinking and decision making for casters, you complain that you chose B/X instead of BECMI, AD&D 2e or OSE Advanced Fantasy, where all these (often petty) gripes are fixed. (There are optional rules in 2e spells & magic for playing with spell points, but again I wouldn’t recommend it).
Your criticism is 50 years late and the points have already been adressed.