Yeah, I considered downloading that mod about a million times but the balance issues kept making me reconsider.
With a lot of mods like that, it just gives you the freedom to run the characters more as you want. You don't have to do anything that looks like a cheat or unbalanced to you.
I know, but I'm the kind of person who struggles with temptation. It's not an indictment of the quality of the mod, rather an indictment of my own self control. : )
The restrictions in the original D&D were far more severe, including level restrictions to race/class combinations. For instance (and strictly from memory mind you) a dwarf cleric could not go past level 7. So it's with a grin I met some of the criticism to the much more liberal racial restrictions of today.
I think its ok to adapt our playing experience to our own desires. But I wouldn't go as far as openly criticize Gary Gygax for his game design choices. They made sense at the time and displayed foresight, since anyone wishing to break all barriers to race/class restrictions will rarely (if ever) play a human again.
Those rules still make sense today. Make no mistake. For that same reason (notice how we vehemently we argued against the 3rd edition decision to remove all restrictions). It their dimension that we argue goes beyond common sense sometimes. But it's only an illusory idea. We are simply trying to justify our desire to experiment with a race/class combination of our preference and blame the rules for not letting us. Well, we shouldn't condemn the rules. We should just accept them as being good rules (there would be racial disadvantages to play as a human and everyone would argue against that too) and instead just alter them for our benefit and be done with it.
To be clear, I'd steer away from a direct criticism of the rules. The racial restrictions only conflict with our personal interests, not with the game world, its balance, and its other rules.
@szb I actually did wonder the same thing myself, just not today lmao, but I think that question is a good addition or seperate question. I don't think Elves should be limited so much. @Grulo that's some interesting information, but I think 3rd edition got it dumb wrong... every race having no class restrictions seems really stupid in retrospect.
Personally, the races after elves, half elves, and humans deserve more options... and why halflings can't be bards is stupid... BUT again, back to the question at hand, what is the RP reason behind the 2nd edition rules for lack of Cleric multi class support among elves?
I'm pretty sure gnomes not only have more options than Elves, but have 4 option (F/I, C/I, T/I and C/T) that no other race (except Half Orcs with CT) can become. Sure no triple classes, but triple classing isn't all too ideal IMHO.
Elves. The AD&D Original Edition Unearthed Arcana reference book allowed elves to become druids. Only sylvan elves may achieve druidhood, perhaps in remote areas such as lost islands or other worlds. Sylvan elf druids can reach 12th level (like regular clerics) and can take the Herbalist kit from The Complete Book of Elves (pgs. 83-84). They always fall under the forest druid branch. Interested players might develop a druidlike priest kit for an elf, such as the halfling’s Leaftender. Though drow cannot become druids, half-drow (like all half-elves) can; these almost always become gray druids.
Here are some interesting multi/dual class druid options that would have been neat to see. Also apparently Desert Druids could use shortbows. That would have been nice to have. Ranger/Druid sounds like a class I was looking for.
Multi-Class Druids Only half-elves can be multi-class druids. Multi-class druids must abide by the weapon, shield, and armor restrictions of their branches. The PH (pgs. 22, 44) mentions the half-elf’s options of druid/fighter, druid/ranger, druid/mage, and druid/fighter/mage. (Some earlier printings incorrectly cite only the druid/fighter combination on p. 44.) Druid/Fighter. The core AD&D rules permit the druid/fighter. Druid/Ranger. The core AD&D rules permit the druid/ranger. The Complete Ranger’s Handbook, p. 79, gives guidelines for playing such characters: A Nature deity of good alignment must exist whose specialty priests are all druids. This priesthood must ally with a group of rangers. Any half-elf druid/ranger must obey the level limits for demihumans (DMG, p. 15), making it unlikely for the character to compete for high levels of druidic power. The druid/ranger’s multiple interests antagonize conservative druids, and the character usually suffers from divided loyalties. (Create a similar character with fewer problems by giving a druid/fighter the Avenger or Beastfriend kit, described in the next chapter.) Druid/Mage and Druid/Fighter/Mage. The core AD&D rules permit the druid/mage and druid/fighter/mage. While these combinations exist, they remain rare and require the DM’s permission. They cannot wear armor or use shields, and must limit their weapons to those permitted to druids.
Dual-Class Druids All normal rules for dual-class characters apply to druids. The druid’s restriction to neutral alignment limits the options to bard/druid, fighter/druid, wizard/druid, and thief/druid. Some druids prefer to see the upper ranks of the Order filled by “pure” druids those who have devoted their lives solely to the Order. Dual-class characters sometimes face prejudice from other druids. Fighter/druids. Often acting as wandering guardians of Nature and country folk (much like neutral rangers), fighter/druids also can become hermit-knights, living away from society and defending a particular grove with their lives. Fighters who become druids often do so because they seek spiritual growth, because they have grown disgusted with the world of man, or occasionally as penance for a particular misdeed. Druids who become fighters, on the other hand, want to take a more direct approach to defending the wilderness; others seek to attune themselves to Nature by mastering their own bodies usingeastern-style fighting arts, often becoming rather enigmatic Zenlike warrior-mystics. Wizard/druids. Looked upon with deep suspicion by most other druids, wizard/druids generally find themselves stereotyped as untrustworthy or scheming. Conservative elements within the druidic order often attempt to block wizard/druids from reaching 12th level. If they fail, they deliberately encourage rising druids to challenge the dual-class character to a duel in preference to other targets. Wizards usually become druids for philosophical reasons: either a fear that unrestrained use of magical or divine forces threatens the cosmic balance, or a desire to learn the druidic arts to better understand the workings of Nature. Druids who study wizardry most often see this magic as another part of Nature to study and master. Thief/druids. Such combinations appear rarely, since the city serves as the optimum home base for the thief. As with wizard/druids, people tend to distrust thief/druids. A druid who becomes a thief usually does so after becoming disillusioned with the druidic order. A thief becomes a druid usually as the result of highly unusual circumstances an outlaw flees to the wilderness to escape pursuit only to befriend a local druid, come to love Nature, and decide to adopt a new way of life. High-level Dual-Class Druids. A dual-class character who achieved a high level as a fighter or wizard before becoming a druid has an edge in the challenge a druid faces to advance beyond 11th level. For fairness, the Order generally bans such player characters from initiating challenges; they can gain experience levels above 11th only to fill a vacancy. DMs with a taste for political intrigue may permit an exception if the character receives special dispensation from the druidic order. This means a dual-class druid must have a sponsor: in theory, a higher-level druid who attests to the character’s fairness and commitment to the Order. In practice, the sponsor is often a druid who wants a dangerous rival removed and believes the dual-class character has a good chance of doing so! In the case of wizard/druids, however, the Order often (but not always) forbids wizard spells during the challenge. A peculiar situation can occur if a character has achieved 12th to 15th level as a druid, then adopts another class. In effect, such characters have “dropped out” of the Order. Although inactive as druids, they retain their former Hit Dice and hit points. When they wish to use their druidic powers again (after achieving one level more in the new class than their druid level), they must challenge an incumbent for the high-level druidic position they once held. A dual-class character who loses the challenge must drop a level, as usual but then may face another challenge and another, until the player character eventually wins a position or falls to 11th level. As a result of this danger, dual-class player characters usually prefer to switch classes before reaching 12th level or after exceeding 15th level.
Browsing through the dead threads, I've noticed this one: "Why can't elves..."
You know, the question in the OP was VERY far from what I've thought this thread is about
But the question in the OP is indeed interesting.
Only Half-Elves can be Cleric/Mages, though Gnomes can be Cleric/Illusionists.
Many races from other sources can combine the two classes.
Elves cannot.
Why?
This's what I've managed to find. In the 1e clerics of non-human races tend not to adventure, and are always quite old. This can be a reason of why only humans and half-humans are actively clerics. Maybe being a cleric (and multiclass) was a sort of "special ability" for half-humans?
Only Half-Elves can be Cleric/Mages, though Gnomes can be Cleric/Illusionists.
Many races from other sources can combine the two classes.
Elves cannot.
Why?
This's what I've managed to find. In the 1e clerics of non-human races tend not to adventure, and are always quite old. This can be a reason of why only humans and half-humans are actively clerics. Maybe being a cleric (and multiclass) was a sort of "special ability" for half-humans?
For the same reason a halfling can be a fighter, cleric, thief, or fighter/thief, but can't be a fighter/cleric or a cleric/thief.
Elfs, Dwarves and Halflings should not be as diversified and polyvalent as Humans. Because by doing so you lose the mythical element of this fabulous races. That's why class restrictions by race are essential.
Elfs have their origin traced to Norse Mythology and Germanic Folklore. These beings was directly linked with magic and finesse. They are also prominently associated with sexual threads and seducing people (this feature is clear in Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream). So, it's very understandable why elfs can be Enchanters. The other school of magic in wich they can specialize in, Divination, is clearly an influence of Tolkien. It's based on Galadriel's clairvoyance powers. If you ask me, I don't see much reason in why to allow any other specialization for elfs. Of course exceptions could be made for specific characters, but that is contemplated by the DM's Golden Rule (Or EE Keeper, in the case of BG).
About multiclassing with Cleric and another Class, I don't think it's appropriate. Elfs are much closer to fairies than to angels. So, they should be much more closer to the Arcane than to the Divine. It's ok if you want to be an Elf that is a Cleric. But Mages should be more common and a more natural way for them. So, I think that not allowing Elfs to multiclass with Cleric is a reasonable decision.
I think Gygax's arguments quoted a page ago, while dated, still have a kernel of truth. If every race could be every class and every combo, who would be human fighters? Elves are innately magical and dexterous and they don't sleep and they live for 1200 years (and even then don't die) and they can run on top of snow and they can be a fighter and a mage at the same time. That's just *cool.*
The problem with Gygax's argument is that original AD&D put level limits in place for certain classes, specifically thieves. By his own logic, every thief guild in the world should be run by a halfling or elf, since they are flat-out better thieves and have no limit on advancement.
As to the demihumans' longer lifespan, it's worth noting that adventuring is a high-risk profession. Yeah, your elf wizard might live to 750 years old, but if you want to learn something beyond the basic magic missile or charm person spells, your life expectancy drops to about five months after you begin adventuring. Consider every adventurer's career a no-reload challenge and you'll get an idea as to how tough it is to survive to even 2nd level.
AD&D level limits were arbitrary and poorly thought out. Moreover, they were useless in most games, since many players stuck to the low levels where demihumans had all the advantages and no drawbacks. The better way of handling the issue was to give humans advantages that made them balanced compared to other races. In Baldur's Gate, I'm not sure it matters, since the number of times that a half-elf's 30% resistance to charm magic is useful to me falls into the category of "not enough for me to care."
Elfs, Dwarves and Halflings should not be as diversified and polyvalent as Humans. Because by doing so you lose the mythical element of this fabulous races. That's why class restrictions by race are essential.
Elfs have their origin traced to Norse Mythology and Germanic Folklore. These beings was directly linked with magic and finesse. They are also prominently associated with sexual threads and seducing people (this feature is clear in Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream). So, it's very understandable why elfs can be Enchanters. The other school of magic in wich they can specialize in, Divination, is clearly an influence of Tolkien. It's based on Galadriel's clairvoyance powers. If you ask me, I don't see much reason in why to allow any other specialization for elfs. Of course exceptions could be made for specific characters, but that is contemplated by the DM's Golden Rule (Or EE Keeper, in the case of BG).
About multiclassing with Cleric and another Class, I don't think it's appropriate. Elfs are much closer to fairies than to angels. So, they should be much more closer to the Arcane than to the Divine. It's ok if you want to be an Elf that is a Cleric. But Mages should be more common and a more natural way for them. So, I think that not allowing Elfs to multiclass with Cleric is a reasonable decision.
In my opinion the races loose the "mythical element" just through the act of classifying and mechanicising them into races to begin with, so that's pretty much a non-argument to me.
In my opinion the races loose the "mythical element" just through the act of classifying and mechanicising them into races to begin with, so that's pretty much a non-argument to me.
I think you're making a misconception in the meaning of "Race" per "Species". If you're categorizing Elfs and Dwarves by the darwinistic idea of "Species", then you're assuming would be right. But "Race" have a much more ancient concept. In norse mythology, Aesir (Asgardians) was a race, Vanir was another race. Elves, Dwarves and Men was races as well. J.R.R. Tolkien got inspiration in Norse mythology to categorize the races of Valar, Maiar, Elfs and Dwarves in middle-earth. At least for me, stories like The Lord of the Rings or Nibelungenlied have very tasteful "mythical elements".
In my opinion, if you're Role Playing, there is absolutely no contradiction in classifying and thinking in the mechanics of the rules. Because when you incarnate your character, you have to pretend there is no numbers, no mechanics. Just the story.
I am a big fan of legends and mythologies. So, it would never be attractive for me to play D&D without the power of myth of demi-human races. For a Sci-Fi scenario, like Star Wars, the concept of "Species" are fine, for Aliens. But for epic fantasy campaign settings it wouldn't work for me.
Elfs, Dwarves and Halflings should not be as diversified and polyvalent as Humans. Because by doing so you lose the mythical element of this fabulous races. That's why class restrictions by race are essential.
Elfs have their origin traced to Norse Mythology and Germanic Folklore. These beings was directly linked with magic and finesse. They are also prominently associated with sexual threads and seducing people (this feature is clear in Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream). So, it's very understandable why elfs can be Enchanters. The other school of magic in wich they can specialize in, Divination, is clearly an influence of Tolkien. It's based on Galadriel's clairvoyance powers. If you ask me, I don't see much reason in why to allow any other specialization for elfs. Of course exceptions could be made for specific characters, but that is contemplated by the DM's Golden Rule (Or EE Keeper, in the case of BG).
About multiclassing with Cleric and another Class, I don't think it's appropriate. Elfs are much closer to fairies than to angels. So, they should be much more closer to the Arcane than to the Divine. It's ok if you want to be an Elf that is a Cleric. But Mages should be more common and a more natural way for them. So, I think that not allowing Elfs to multiclass with Cleric is a reasonable decision.
In my opinion the races loose the "mythical element" just through the act of classifying and mechanicising them into races to begin with, so that's pretty much a non-argument to me.
You don't have to like it or accept it. But it is the reason the rules were written that way.
Elf in-game description: "Their features are finely chiseled and delicate, and they speak in melodic tones. Elves are looked upon as being frivolous and aloof. They concern themselves with natural beauty, dancing, frolicking, and other similar pursuits. Their humor is clever, as are their songs and poetry."
How various "races" are handled and depicted in folklore and myth is very different from how fantasy rpgs (and basically all high fantasy) classifies and sorts them into races. The first is a lot more fluid and, well, mythical, while the latter is treating it overly literal and is more about making things biological, imposing arbitrary restrictions and mechanics, and generally trying to formalize things that were never formal to begin with.
Trying to argue that race class limits make sense because of "mythical element" falls short both because of both the mechanisation and the high fantasy setting means stepping away from the mythical and because we're trying to portray an actually living and breathing world full of living people who would be free to choose to pursue whatever line of work they'd like. Pretty much.
The restrictions in the original D&D were far more severe, including level restrictions to race/class combinations. For instance (and strictly from memory mind you) a dwarf cleric could not go past level 7. So it's with a grin I met some of the criticism to the much more liberal racial restrictions of today.
I think its ok to adapt our playing experience to our own desires. But I wouldn't go as far as openly criticize Gary Gygax for his game design choices. They made sense at the time and displayed foresight, since anyone wishing to break all barriers to race/class restrictions will rarely (if ever) play a human again.
Those rules still make sense today. Make no mistake. For that same reason (notice how we vehemently we argued against the 3rd edition decision to remove all restrictions). It their dimension that we argue goes beyond common sense sometimes. But it's only an illusory idea. We are simply trying to justify our desire to experiment with a race/class combination of our preference and blame the rules for not letting us. Well, we shouldn't condemn the rules. We should just accept them as being good rules (there would be racial disadvantages to play as a human and everyone would argue against that too) and instead just alter them for our benefit and be done with it.
To be clear, I'd steer away from a direct criticism of the rules. The racial restrictions only conflict with our personal interests, not with the game world, its balance, and its other rules.
Remember in 1E, every demihuman was unlimited in thief levels though? LOL. Except half Orc, but they were unlimited as assassins.
It would have been a better idea to have given humans some sort of edge in AD&D to encourage their use rather than placing arbitrary limits on demi-humans. Positive reinforcement rather than negative.
3.5 does this and it works.
Too many of AD&D rules seem to be 'because' with no real logic behind them. That said playing AD&D was some of the best years of my life.
It would have been a better idea to have given humans some sort of edge in AD&D to encourage their use rather than placing arbitrary limits on demi-humans. Positive reinforcement rather than negative.
3.5 does this and it works.
Too many of AD&D rules seem to be 'because' with no real logic behind them. That said playing AD&D was some of the best years of my life.
The bonus feat was worth more to most builds than a +2 in a score, so many powergamey builds will default to human in 3.x, though the skill points were cool too. This was a better way to achieve the same goal I agree.
The biggest problem I have with older editions of DnD was how Gygax seemed very condescending and dismissive of anyone who didn't want to play his way... he was open to finetuning to taste, but he seemed terrified of 'munchkin' characters. Anyone who wanted to change certain tennents had to be trying to get a relatively overpowered character... I think he was paranoid about bullies, though nobody likes playing with a pure minmax munchkin gamer, so I can usually see where he comes from.
To be fair this is a BG issue, not a 2e issue, 2e allowed elf bards (Spellsingers) as well as dwarf bards (Chanters) and halfling bards (Whistlers). Bioware just failed to account for such things when they coded the game.
To be completely fair, it's also a 2e issue if you didn't/couldn't buy the right splatbooks to find those special exceptions. The only "Complete" books I had were Fighters and Elves, and the latter told me Elves couldn't be bards because their music was so awesome it ruined things for everyone else. I can understand wanting to take into account the whole of an edition when debating its merits, but placing arbitrary restrictions on characters only to lift them in later products is annoying.
Comments
I think its ok to adapt our playing experience to our own desires. But I wouldn't go as far as openly criticize Gary Gygax for his game design choices. They made sense at the time and displayed foresight, since anyone wishing to break all barriers to race/class restrictions will rarely (if ever) play a human again.
Those rules still make sense today. Make no mistake. For that same reason (notice how we vehemently we argued against the 3rd edition decision to remove all restrictions). It their dimension that we argue goes beyond common sense sometimes. But it's only an illusory idea. We are simply trying to justify our desire to experiment with a race/class combination of our preference and blame the rules for not letting us. Well, we shouldn't condemn the rules. We should just accept them as being good rules (there would be racial disadvantages to play as a human and everyone would argue against that too) and instead just alter them for our benefit and be done with it.
To be clear, I'd steer away from a direct criticism of the rules. The racial restrictions only conflict with our personal interests, not with the game world, its balance, and its other rules.
Elves. The AD&D Original Edition Unearthed Arcana reference book allowed elves to become
druids. Only sylvan elves may achieve druidhood, perhaps in remote areas such as lost islands or
other worlds. Sylvan elf druids can reach 12th level (like regular clerics) and can take the Herbalist
kit from The Complete Book of Elves (pgs. 83-84). They always fall under the forest druid branch.
Interested players might develop a druidlike priest kit for an elf, such as the halfling’s Leaftender.
Though drow cannot become druids, half-drow (like all half-elves) can; these almost always become
gray druids.
Multi-Class Druids
Only half-elves can be multi-class druids. Multi-class druids must abide by the weapon, shield,
and armor restrictions of their branches. The PH (pgs. 22, 44) mentions the half-elf’s options of
druid/fighter, druid/ranger, druid/mage, and druid/fighter/mage. (Some earlier printings incorrectly
cite only the druid/fighter combination on
p. 44.)
Druid/Fighter. The core AD&D rules permit the druid/fighter.
Druid/Ranger. The core AD&D rules permit the druid/ranger. The Complete Ranger’s Handbook, p. 79, gives guidelines for playing such characters: A Nature deity of good alignment must
exist whose specialty priests are all druids. This priesthood must ally with a group of rangers. Any
half-elf druid/ranger must obey the level limits for demihumans (DMG, p. 15), making it unlikely for
the character to compete for high levels of druidic power. The druid/ranger’s multiple interests
antagonize conservative druids, and the character usually suffers from divided loyalties. (Create a
similar character with fewer problems by giving a druid/fighter the Avenger or Beastfriend kit,
described in the next chapter.)
Druid/Mage and Druid/Fighter/Mage. The core AD&D rules permit the druid/mage and
druid/fighter/mage. While these combinations exist, they remain rare and require the DM’s permission. They cannot wear armor or use shields, and must limit their weapons to those permitted to
druids.
Dual-Class Druids
All normal rules for dual-class characters apply to druids. The druid’s restriction to neutral
alignment limits the options to bard/druid, fighter/druid, wizard/druid, and thief/druid. Some druids
prefer to see the upper ranks of the Order filled by “pure” druids those who have devoted their lives
solely to the Order. Dual-class characters sometimes face prejudice from other druids.
Fighter/druids. Often acting as wandering guardians of Nature and country folk (much like
neutral rangers), fighter/druids also can become hermit-knights, living away from society and defending a particular grove with their lives. Fighters who become druids often do so because they seek
spiritual growth, because they have grown disgusted with the world of man, or occasionally as
penance for a particular misdeed.
Druids who become fighters, on the other hand, want to take a more direct approach to defending the wilderness; others seek to attune themselves to Nature by mastering their own bodies usingeastern-style fighting arts, often becoming rather enigmatic Zenlike warrior-mystics.
Wizard/druids. Looked upon with deep suspicion by most other druids, wizard/druids generally find themselves stereotyped as untrustworthy or scheming. Conservative elements within the
druidic order often attempt to block wizard/druids from reaching 12th level. If they fail, they deliberately encourage rising druids to challenge the dual-class character to a duel in preference to other
targets.
Wizards usually become druids for philosophical reasons: either a fear that unrestrained use of
magical or divine forces threatens the cosmic balance, or a desire to learn the druidic arts to better
understand the workings of Nature. Druids who study wizardry most often see this magic as another
part of Nature to study and master.
Thief/druids. Such combinations appear rarely, since the city serves as the optimum home base
for the thief. As with wizard/druids, people tend to distrust thief/druids. A druid who becomes a thief
usually does so after becoming disillusioned with the druidic order. A thief becomes a druid usually
as the result of highly unusual circumstances an outlaw flees to the wilderness to escape pursuit only
to befriend a local druid, come to love Nature, and decide to adopt a new way of life.
High-level Dual-Class Druids. A dual-class character who achieved a high level as a fighter or
wizard before becoming a druid has an edge in the challenge a druid faces to advance beyond 11th
level. For fairness, the Order generally bans such player characters from initiating challenges; they
can gain experience levels above 11th only to fill a vacancy.
DMs with a taste for political intrigue may permit an exception if the character receives special
dispensation from the druidic order. This means a dual-class druid must have a sponsor: in theory, a
higher-level druid who attests to the character’s fairness and commitment to the Order. In practice,
the sponsor is often a druid who wants a dangerous rival removed and believes the dual-class character has a good chance of doing so! In the case of wizard/druids, however, the Order often (but not
always) forbids wizard spells during the challenge.
A peculiar situation can occur if a character has achieved 12th to 15th level as a druid, then
adopts another class. In effect, such characters have “dropped out” of the Order. Although inactive as
druids, they retain their former Hit Dice and hit points. When they wish to use their druidic powers
again (after achieving one level more in the new class than their druid level), they must challenge an
incumbent for the high-level druidic position they once held.
A dual-class character who loses the challenge must drop a level, as usual but then may face
another challenge and another, until the player character eventually wins a position or falls to 11th
level. As a result of this danger, dual-class player characters usually prefer to switch classes before
reaching 12th level or after exceeding 15th level.
You know, the question in the OP was VERY far from what I've thought this thread is about
But the question in the OP is indeed interesting.
Only Half-Elves can be Cleric/Mages, though Gnomes can be Cleric/Illusionists.
Many races from other sources can combine the two classes.
Elves cannot.
Why?
This's what I've managed to find. In the 1e clerics of non-human races tend not to adventure, and are always quite old. This can be a reason of why only humans and half-humans are actively clerics. Maybe being a cleric (and multiclass) was a sort of "special ability" for half-humans?
Elfs have their origin traced to Norse Mythology and Germanic Folklore. These beings was directly linked with magic and finesse. They are also prominently associated with sexual threads and seducing people (this feature is clear in Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream). So, it's very understandable why elfs can be Enchanters. The other school of magic in wich they can specialize in, Divination, is clearly an influence of Tolkien. It's based on Galadriel's clairvoyance powers. If you ask me, I don't see much reason in why to allow any other specialization for elfs. Of course exceptions could be made for specific characters, but that is contemplated by the DM's Golden Rule (Or EE Keeper, in the case of BG).
About multiclassing with Cleric and another Class, I don't think it's appropriate. Elfs are much closer to fairies than to angels. So, they should be much more closer to the Arcane than to the Divine. It's ok if you want to be an Elf that is a Cleric. But Mages should be more common and a more natural way for them. So, I think that not allowing Elfs to multiclass with Cleric is a reasonable decision.
As to the demihumans' longer lifespan, it's worth noting that adventuring is a high-risk profession. Yeah, your elf wizard might live to 750 years old, but if you want to learn something beyond the basic magic missile or charm person spells, your life expectancy drops to about five months after you begin adventuring. Consider every adventurer's career a no-reload challenge and you'll get an idea as to how tough it is to survive to even 2nd level.
AD&D level limits were arbitrary and poorly thought out. Moreover, they were useless in most games, since many players stuck to the low levels where demihumans had all the advantages and no drawbacks. The better way of handling the issue was to give humans advantages that made them balanced compared to other races. In Baldur's Gate, I'm not sure it matters, since the number of times that a half-elf's 30% resistance to charm magic is useful to me falls into the category of "not enough for me to care."
Hell... in Baldur's Gate they can't even be regular, plain old druids. What's up with that?
In my opinion, if you're Role Playing, there is absolutely no contradiction in classifying and thinking in the mechanics of the rules. Because when you incarnate your character, you have to pretend there is no numbers, no mechanics. Just the story.
I am a big fan of legends and mythologies. So, it would never be attractive for me to play D&D without the power of myth of demi-human races. For a Sci-Fi scenario, like Star Wars, the concept of "Species" are fine, for Aliens. But for epic fantasy campaign settings it wouldn't work for me.
Elf in-game mechanics: Can't be bards.
Me: Seriously?
Trying to argue that race class limits make sense because of "mythical element" falls short both because of both the mechanisation and the high fantasy setting means stepping away from the mythical and because we're trying to portray an actually living and breathing world full of living people who would be free to choose to pursue whatever line of work they'd like. Pretty much.
3.5 does this and it works.
Too many of AD&D rules seem to be 'because' with no real logic behind them. That said playing AD&D was some of the best years of my life.
The biggest problem I have with older editions of DnD was how Gygax seemed very condescending and dismissive of anyone who didn't want to play his way... he was open to finetuning to taste, but he seemed terrified of 'munchkin' characters. Anyone who wanted to change certain tennents had to be trying to get a relatively overpowered character... I think he was paranoid about bullies, though nobody likes playing with a pure minmax munchkin gamer, so I can usually see where he comes from.