Stats

Yes and no.

The problem with a shitty endurance, is that the lifespan of an Armageddon combat character - once you get over the initial hump of being a decent fighter to begin with - is that it is measured in the thousands of events, rather than mere dozens or hundreds.

This means that if something only has a 1% chance of happening, it will eventually happen to you dozens of times throughout your career. Perhaps even once or twice a day (if say, you have a 99% chance to avoid all hits). Some of those hits may be grazes. But one out of a thousand, or ten thousand will be a serious crit.

You will take big hits. No matter how good you are. Weird shit will happen. A high endurance WON'T be the difference between a two, five, ten or even twenty day character. That's what strength, agility and your meta-knowledge at skilling up will decide.

But it WILL be the difference between a twenty day, forty day or sixty day character. Where no amount of skill or meta-knowledge will help you, and it's simply based on luck.

That's why you rarely see a long-lived elven warrior around, who doesn't say, become a sorcerer or some shit.

I've had a character, who was so buff, that it would take a 1 in 100,000 chance to line up a decent blow on him. But it did happen, and he did get knocked out, and he did die. It was purely inevitable. If he'd been a dwarf, he would've lived.

Yes. 

Endurance is just underrated. Aside from surviving critical hits, it's crucial in surviving falls and backstabs as well as bludgeon weapons. These things are fairly frequent killers. Eventually players get so experienced that falling stops being a serious concern as you simply know every fall room in the game, but there are also times when you can't avoid it, such as being magicked off a mountain or getting that absurd 'you fall and hurt your neck' climb critfail and losing 100+ stun. Spells also deal damage in increments that make it very dangerous to have less than 100hp.

Having high hp/stun is not about surviving an extra attack during a long fight, it's about avoiding one-shot scenarios. It's also important because having scan/watch and barrier active reduces your max stun by as much as 20ish stun depending on your stats. If your base max was 100, that'd put you way below what's safe for wilderness travel or fighting against bludgeoners (and, to some extent, piercing). Ideally you want to have over 100 stun with barrier and scan/watch up or you're vulnerable to knockout.

If you make an elf and prioritize agility and strength, it's unlikely that you'll get more than 100-105ish hp. Possibly even less. You'd have to get an unrealistically good stat roll to get the 110+ (and, IMO, really 120+) that elevates a character to truly viable for serious PvP. Getting 120 hp on an elf is a stretch even if you prioritized it first, which is also a large part of why elves fucking suck. An elven warrior with exceptional strength and agility and 100 hp would be a shitty character. I'd take a human warrior with exceptional strength and endurance, ~good agility, and 125+ hp any day.

Another day, another crippled character doomed to have its ass kicked from here to the day its misery is ended.

I bet he was a ranger with strength prioritized...right?

Yep, and priority order was Strength, Agility, Endurance, Wisdom. Age was 30.

That actually might be a possibility.