2e is sort of the system I cut my teeth on, and it's the one that really feels like home to me. Though I don't like any of the following editions, really, there were a couple of things that D&D should have had all along that were finally introduced in 3e. So I'd like some input on a few changes. I know some people are likely to think that the changes shouldn't be made because it goes against tradition. If you're one of those people, please remain silent. While I understand the desire to cling to tradition, it isn't personally appropriate to me for RPG rules. I'm only interested in input from a balance point of view.

I haven't DMed in more years than I can count. So what I'd like is if people could throw in ideas on how to make these points work, since I lack the experience to do so.

Racial restrictions
Halfling wizards or paladins should be a really strange sight, as should human fighter/cleric/wizards, and the occurrence of NPCs of these combinations should be somewhere between rare and non-existant. But PCs are oddities and exceptions, made of sterner (and stranger) stuff than the rank and file. Though I mostly dislike 3e, I love that you can actually create characters with interesting class setups. Kits should still be restricted if it's obviously something specific to a race. Obviously humans are supposed to be "more adaptable" to make up for the lack of special abilities, so they need to have something to make up for them. One suggestion I saw was that humans receive 2 bonus stat points to spend, though they can't both go on the same stat.

Racial level limits
I really don't like these. I know these are supposed to make up for the special abilities that demihumans possess, but when they're used it seems that you're either playing a low level campaign where they mean nothing, or a high level campaign where everyone is forced to play a human. I'd prefer to just drop them.

Stat requirements
I approve of the purpose behind these. Paladins, for example, are supposed to be shining beacons for everyone to rally to first, and soldiers second, thus the 17 Cha requirement. But I don't like that almost nobody is able to play them without some super generous rolling setup. I saw an idea where the requirements rather become priorities. Paladins normally require Str 12, Con 9, Wis 13, Cha 17. I'm desperate to play a paladin as I have a great concept in mind, but unfortunately I rolled 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9. Under the ability priorities rule, I must put the 15 on Cha, as that's the closest roll to 17 I have. As the other rolls exceed the requirements, I have more leeway, and decide to put 14 Str, 13 Wis, 12 Con, and so on.

Other
I don't get the prime req. bonus to XP, which punishes the weakest member(s) of the group by making their betters slowly get even better than them. It doesn't even make sense that a fighter learns faster because he hits harder. Restricting it to Int or Wis, which would make more sense, just favours wizards and clerics. I'd prefer to drop these as well.