RNG is bullshit

Has RNG ever been done correctly? Can it be done correctly?
I ask because I can't remember any games that applied RNG well. I feel like chance is a thing that should never be incorporated in to a serious game. Mechanics that rely too heavily on RNG serve the whims of the lucky too often and detriment the unlucky too harmfully.

Pokemon

...

RNG is great and here's why: If everything that happens in your game is caused directly by player actions with no deviation things get boring really quickly. RNG fixes that and adds in variety as well as opportunities in terms of crits or similar RNG. You don't want to be able to know exactly how a fight is going to play out based on stats alone, that's fucking boring.

This is a shitty argument that has been debunked countless times.

Chess is fucking terribly boring, it suffers from exactly the problems I described. Since there is no variation all the game boils down to on a high level is memorizing thousands of lines and openings. That's not what I'd consider a fun game.

Randomness can only be approximated with computers and, if you go for "real" randomness it'll only piss off people because they will project patters onto it so the game appears to fuck with you. See Nu-Com.

If you're going to use "I don't personally find X incredibly popular and long-lasting game fun, therefore RNG is good" as your argument, then we're done here.

Morrowind

Chess requires actual skill, though. You may argue that the skill comes from memorizing "lines and openings", but that is where the challenge comes in. The difficulty comes from the player himself, not the game. That is what makes chess so timeless and great. Would it be fair if every time you tried to knockout an enemy's unit, there is a 25% chance your attack will miss?