I think it's often a mistake to look at 2E so much as a single product. It grew, changed and morphed a lot over time. And I think that reflected the way every DM, every campaign, was all its own. I've played PNP games where non-human Bards were allowed, and games where they weren't. It depends on the DM, on the setting in use, even on the back story for the players; I've also seen games where players could only be Human, could only be Humans or Halflings (a world of mine), could be any race but only Warriors or Rogues...
Obviously, if too many restrictions seem arbitrary or silly it can be discouraging to the players. But a restriction on its own is neither good nor bad, it just is what it is.
Actually, I wanted to get into this a little more. I never see the question of "why can't elves..." To be terribly interesting on a mechanical level. Mechanically, every race can be made to do any class just fine.
My way of looking at it is always campaign/setting centered. I mentioned above that I ran a game where players could only be humans or halflings. Actually, it was more of a game within a game, long story. But what I did was design a setting that was ancient Egypt in geography and style. Players could only be humans or halflings, because those were the only known races. And Halflings were all an enslaved underclass, that only start as fighters, thieves or fighter/thieves. There were a small number of Halfling true clerics, but none of them were adventurers, and the class was off limits to PCs. The humans were the land owners and wealthy. They could be any class at all. Well any of the classes I was using (no Druids, no Monks, no Barabarians). BUT; the dominant religion of the land was apostate. It was false. It was run by powerful Mages and liches. All arcane, no divine. There was a true religion. But it was considered heretical and illegal. This was NOT the main focus or point of the campaign, well not early on anyway. But it did mean any character with divine abilities in the party (cleric, paladin OR ranger) had to keep it quiet and under wraps. What I knew, and the players didn't, was that once their clerics got above fourth level they were the most powerful clerics in this world.
None this has to do directly with elves. Except to say I had an idea and concept for a setting that determined race and class availability. And that is the background for a lot of the limitations we see on race and class we see in AD&D. It's because of what a particular setting was conceived to be. Especially Greyhawk and the Realms. But the Realms have changed so much over a long history, original concepts have been modified or abandoned, leaving a confusing mish mash of possibilities and restrictions. Some of those restrictions make more sense than others, some made more sense years ago than they do now. I have no issue with anyone designing or running a world however they want. But I'm often less enthused about drift within an established setting. At this point, the Realms are really all about drift. But I remain passionately disinterested (?!) in it all.
In the original game elves could get extra abilities, but they could not progress any further in levels. The professions are something for humans to do. The level caps are an easy way to balance things, but they were not implemented fairly.
Comments
Obviously, if too many restrictions seem arbitrary or silly it can be discouraging to the players. But a restriction on its own is neither good nor bad, it just is what it is.
My way of looking at it is always campaign/setting centered.
I mentioned above that I ran a game where players could only be humans or halflings. Actually, it was more of a game within a game, long story.
But what I did was design a setting that was ancient Egypt in geography and style. Players could only be humans or halflings, because those were the only known races. And Halflings were all an enslaved underclass, that only start as fighters, thieves or fighter/thieves. There were a small number of Halfling true clerics, but none of them were adventurers, and the class was off limits to PCs.
The humans were the land owners and wealthy. They could be any class at all. Well any of the classes I was using (no Druids, no Monks, no Barabarians). BUT; the dominant religion of the land was apostate. It was false. It was run by powerful Mages and liches. All arcane, no divine. There was a true religion. But it was considered heretical and illegal. This was NOT the main focus or point of the campaign, well not early on anyway. But it did mean any character with divine abilities in the party (cleric, paladin OR ranger) had to keep it quiet and under wraps. What I knew, and the players didn't, was that once their clerics got above fourth level they were the most powerful clerics in this world.
None this has to do directly with elves. Except to say I had an idea and concept for a setting that determined race and class availability. And that is the background for a lot of the limitations we see on race and class we see in AD&D. It's because of what a particular setting was conceived to be. Especially Greyhawk and the Realms. But the Realms have changed so much over a long history, original concepts have been modified or abandoned, leaving a confusing mish mash of possibilities and restrictions.
Some of those restrictions make more sense than others, some made more sense years ago than they do now.
I have no issue with anyone designing or running a world however they want. But I'm often less enthused about drift within an established setting. At this point, the Realms are really all about drift. But I remain passionately disinterested (?!) in it all.
The level caps are an easy way to balance things, but they were not implemented fairly.