Sure, but I think that's a form of arguing about semantics.

Let's say I argue that our universe is fine-tuned because the constants of the universe were decided by dice roll and that there are a trillion other universes with no chance of life.

What about the "substrate" within which these trillion universes formed? Wasn't it fine-tuned enough to give rise to at least one universe (ours) with life, just as our universe was fine-tuned enough to give rise to our planet?

Now I could argue that actually there are a trillion such "universe substrates" and ours is the one that's fine-tuned. However, it's clear that eventually, everything must converge to a single base layer of existence that just so happens to be "fine-tuned" enough for everything above it to produce at least one instance of life. But this is trivial.