Perhaps read Niara's post (earlier in this thread)? They have (apparently) fiddled with the RNG so it is not random - I don't mind random, but they have seemingly changed their RNG to manipulate odds in some cases, which is clearly not random. D&D assumes that you have a random source and the modifiers you add mean the randomness should have less impact as you level, certainly against weaker enemies. There are also plenty of ways in 5E to even the odds (mainly through advantage/spells/abilities) - more in BG3 than normal, actually.
Basically: if they have an actual unbiased RNG, then I am fine with missing now and then due to randomness. Such is life. If they have manipulated their RNG - and I can't confirm this, I didn't do the test others have done - to make your miss more frequently, as the post I referred to sugegsts, then I have an issue with that.
I have read that post before posting my comment - so that comment remains : any "manipulated RNG" is BY FAR less noticeable than misses. In fact, it can not be noticed at all in single fight, or even in dozens of fights - you need hundreds of attacks to even prove it. So if someone is "against manipulated RNG" , I can only assume it is from philosophical reasons - since it is not noticeable at all in actual combat.
