Because elves aren't as hardy.
Why not? Legolas could run for days without tiring, just like Gimli. Clearly some elves are incredibly hardy.
Elves really should have retained the +1 with bows that they used to have. They are no longer the best archers, but then I'm not arguing that they are.
No, you are arguing that a +2 Dex (+1 compared to humans) is vitally important to describing all aspects of elves, more so than any other aspect they have. Which is silly, since they have the exact same dexterity as Goblins, and yet no one would say goblins and elves are identical.
It doesn't make sense, because that's not my argument.
Well you jumped into that conversation and started laying about with your argument, and I said that being able to use the same stats as you would have in a hard-coded system while using a free floating system is easier than the reverse. So, since you are saying I'm wrong you must be saying that using that it is harder to have an elf have +2 Dexterity and +1 Intelligence in a free-floating system than in a hard coded system.
It's easy to forget when in games with feats, variant humans get picked the vast majority of the time.
Except variant human also gets +1 to a stat. Not +0. Also, with a feat, you can get a +2. In fact, a variant human can match point for point any +2/+1 combination of races that are "superior" to humans in those.
Goliaths are stronger and tougher because of +2 str, +1 con? Nope. Human with a +2 str, +1 con is trivial to make at level 1
Elves are more graceul and intelligent with their +2 Dex, +1 Int? Nope, human with a +2 dex and +1 Int is easily made.
So, it is kind of amusing to see people arguing as those humans are +0 across the board when that is utter hogwash.
I'm not conflating anything. You misrepresented my argument and I corrected you on it. There's no tautology in my argument and my argument is based on fact.
Your argument is based on Powerful Build being a +2 Strength. Because you keep talking about both like they are the same thing.
Take away the powerful build ability and they aren't twice as strong, but they would still have a huge size advantage which is appropriately represented by a strength bonus. My argument doesn't change. The silliness with a 70whatever strength is all that changes, but that was your argument in the first place, not mine.
AH, so your argument is that Goliaths are bigger, so they should have a +2 strength. Cool, cool.
Loxodon are on average 7 and a half feet tall and weigh 350 lbs, they do not get a bonus to strength.
A human trivially be taller and heavier than a dwarf, but the dwarf might have the strength bonus, or they might not. In fact, a halfling is just as strong as a loxodon, an elf, a tiefling, a dwarf, a tabaxi, all of whom are twice as big or more and have a far greater size advantage than the goliath over the human. Firbolgs are just as big as Goliaths, yet they are just as strong as humans with that +1 strength
So, I don't think "huge size advantage" is really holding water.
But they don't. And it was never a problem, never a concern... until suddenly people realized that they were the poster child for our point that big races aren't always strong races.
Only because you preferred something else, not because it was somehow inherently broken. "Broken because I don't like it." does not make something broken.
And "it isn't broken because I like it" doesn't mean it isn't broken.
False Equivalences are false. World records get broken as we get better with refining our training techniques, food intake, etc. Not because suddenly physiology drastically changes in a matter of a few decades.
So, woman with an better refined training techinique, food intake, ect could lift more than a man.... seems like that sounds like exactly my point. Weird. Almost as if you keep telling me I'm wrong without looking into what I'm saying.
