This is the first intelligent issue raised by someone in this forum. I commend you for actually sitting down and attempting to find a flaw in the system, and not shouting and crying about "nfts" when the post is about rare sats.
I believe that putting the fee last is the first arguably arbitrary convention. I wouldn't necessarily make the economic argument. Maybe it makes more sense to have the first sats flow into the fee because the coinbase transaction that pays the miner is the first one in the "to-be-confirmed" block. One could also argue that the fee is simply the remainder of the amount in the inputs minus the amount in the outputs (which it is) and that's why you pay the fee last because you need to have a set amount for the outputs to calculate the fees. There are arguments for both arrangements, that's why I agree with you that this may be indeed the single arbitrary consensus about rare sats.
the fee is not part of the change and deducted last
its like bank notes.. the fee is in the UTXO being spent.. the bank note being given to cashier.. the cashier takes/destroys the ownership of the bank note from the customer source. and then as a last even gives the change to the destined customers who ask for the change to be split up as nickels to dave and dimes to the customer
the fee then does not separate and go back to the payment system as it has already been accounted for and deducted originally from the source payment. not after the change