Honestly, the 'trust' angle in a lot of monster-tamer stories feels like a shortcut. They share a meal, they get injured protecting each other once, and boom—unbreakable bond. I'm way more interested in the logistics, the actual slow work. Take the web serial 'The Daily Grind'—the protagonist doesn't befriend the office-goblin monsters through grand gestures. It's about establishing predictable routines, leaving non-threatening offerings, and observing boundaries over weeks. Trust isn't a heartwarming moment; it's the creature not hiding when you enter the room anymore, or taking a risk to grab a tool you left out for it. That subtle shift from 'potential threat' to 'tolerated presence' is way more compelling to me than any magical bond.
A lot of it boils down to redefining 'dangerous.' Is the creature intelligent and malicious, or just operating on instinct in a harsh environment? With a feral beast, trust might be you proving you're not food and can provide food. With something sentient but hostile, like in some LitRPGs where 'monsters' are actually a oppressed species, trust building is political. You have to acknowledge past harm, which most tamer narratives gloss over. They just want the cool pet without the messy history.