I tried to push for more practical approach to playing without a single player, but both in my D&D and in my Blades in the Dark groups, players just feel...uncomfortable with the idea and don't want to play if all players aren't there. I once proposed a system where we could play in smaller groups to accomodate one player's schedule not matching others...and upon realizing they wouldn't be playing in full squad in this sytem, that player just quit the campaign.
This is because WotC designs for mass appeal, so their monsters need to be fair challenge even for an underoptimized group. Which makes them pathetically weak if you're playing with anyone else.
Also, because playtesters at Wizards don't use any magic items for some reason
Yes, it was in Acts of Vengeance, where Loki gathered various supervillains and suggested they switch their enemies in a grand alliance to destroy heroes. Loki assumed they're all evil so they'll get along...and then had a surprised pikachu when Magneto used portals, that Loki set between villain bases and their meeting hall, to go to Red Skull's base, wreck it and kidnapp the guy.
I still got videos with titles like "Five Rule Changes that PROVE One D&D just return of Fourth Edition" or "Did Pathfinder 2e Remastered steal these rules from Fourth Edition?". Like a new clickabit fad, declare everything 4e or something.
The issue with the rolls arises when you have modifiers (like skills), which are in percentage, so you need to sum them up and then cover result and apply it to the roll. Oh and also, you apply Difficulty Levels to your relevant attribute, which are really weird. Easy is -2, Average is 0, Problematic is -2, but then Hard is -5, Damn Hard is -11 and Lucky is -15
So in theory your action should be "roll 3d20, see if you have two successes under relevant attribute" but in practice it's "add DL to your attribute. Sum up all the modifiers, then convert the sum to a percentage of 20.Roll 3d20. Apply the number you got to the roll results. If two or more results are equal or lesser than Attribute, you succeed, othertwise you fail".
And THEN you add complex rules for every single minutia thing on top of it. Or lack of rules for things that were deemed to important, because those were relegated to one of many, many expansions.
Oh and in combat you instead roll a d20, and you need 3 different d20's for 3 different phases of combat.
And then you add the poorly organized book, sometimes contradicting itself (eg. you are supposed to fill a questionnaire to explain character's concept and what they do BEFORE rolling dice in order for your attributes)
And on the way shareholders fire you for not doing what other companies are doing, or exert pressure to force you to adopt the practices they want because they heard they bring profit
You could still make hella profit, indeed. but when you are as big as WotC and, more importantly, Hasbro, hella profit may not be enough to make more profit than previous fiscal year. Shareholders only care about growth, not ethics.
Yes, this baffles me as well.