When we integrate a function, we must make some choice about how we approximate it before we take the limit.
In principle, we can choose $\tau_i$ to be any value between $t_{i-1}$ and $t_i$. But for an ordinary Riemann integral our choice doesn't matter since for any value of the intermediate point $\tau \equiv \frac{\tau_i}{t_i-t_{i-1}}$, we find the same value in the limit of vanishing box sizes.
For stochastic integrals, however, this is no longer the case. For example, for the Itô integral, we choose $\tau =0$, while for the Stratonovich integral we choose $\tau = 0.5$.
I'm wondering what feature of stochastic integrals leads to their dependence on the choice of $\tau$? (Since I'm a physicist by trade, a somewhat intutive argument would be great.)


I think this is actually a backwards question. There's a notion of Lesbegue-Stieltjes integral, $\int_0^t f(s)\textrm{d}g(s)$, of integrating functions against each other. What you'd hope is that $\int_0^t X_s\textrm{d}Y_s$ could be defined pointwise as a Lesbegue-Stieltjes integral, but that would only work if $Y$ had paths of locally bounded variation, and for most interesting processes (martingales and the like), this is simply not true.
Hence, you need to go about things another way when constructing the stochastic integral, and the dependence on the choice of partitioning points is a concrete place where you can see what fails above. The stochastic integral really is a different animal because you're integrating against something with a very wild behaviour. For a bounded variation from, the change in partitioning point does not contribute errors that can accumulate very much. With a function of unbounded variation, that's not true.