Very interesting read.
I agree, limitations can be very useful. They form a backbone to build on creatively, while still letting design and balance to be applied. The basic concept is why we even have a system in the first place; otherwise, we would just have freeform combat, say you can do whatever you want, and offer no limits to what you can do. That quickly devolves into a bunch of peolple saying "I win" "I win first" "I stop you" "I stop you from stopping me" etc. It is the structure of the game which makes it interesting to play. Chess has amazing depths of strategy because you are limited in what you can do at any given time.
The trick, of course, is to create a set of limits that is a positive effect, rather than destructive. Establishing bounds that will foster balance and strategy to the game, rather than bounds that are limiting productive options. Freedom and flexibilty are good, but it is easy to get caught up in them and sacrifice needed bounds in an attempt to increase them.