Strange as it sounds, the idea actually appeals to me.
I've owned a lot of guns over the last few years - not because I really needed most of the but just because I like guns.
But the more I've gone through, the more bad luck I've had with them. It's so bad at this point that there are only a handful of companies that I consider capable of building a working firearm.
Plus, I'm kind of a minimalist by nature.
The idea of one rifle appeals to me but just isn't practical. It's just a little too minimal.
But the idea of just two or three rifles...
Now that would be workable for me.
FWIW, don't discount those who only own one rifle. My grandfather grew up shooting only one rifle, a 99 Savage in .300 Savage.
He went away to WWII and was exposed to Springfields, M1 Garands and Carbines, Thompson Sub guns, and everything else the Army allowed him to qualify on. He was qualified as expert with many of them and I have the medal to prove it.
When he came back, in spite of his experience with "better" guns, he went back to that Savage. I never had the priviledge of hunting with my grandfather because he died about a year before I was old enough to hunt. But according to my dad, my grandfather was able to snap-shoot from either shoulder and drop running deer with head or neck shots at remarkable distances.
One story about him was that he took aim on a running deer and was tracking it to take a shot when he realized that a tree was in his way. He switched the rifle to his left hand mid-swing, squeezed the trigger, and killed the deer.
I've shot that rifle so I understand why he didn't feel an overwhelming need to replace it with something else. If I could find the same thing in .308 I think I'd probably have to have one.
BTW - Pappy didn't install a scope on that rifle until nearly 60 years after he bought it. He only caved in and allowed my dad to get his rifle scoped for him when he got to the point that he could no longer see the sights.
Not a gun nut, but the man was a hunter and one hell of a marksman.