Agree except for the more trust thing. I dont see the gm as having more power. He has only the ability to set rules within the acceptable area the players are allowing.I did notice. That's why I was calling the example hogwash.
The DM absolutely is in a position that requires more trust than any given player. Precisely because you are not in competition with the DM and he or she is the only "player" who has the ability to not be bound by any rules and yet still be operating within the rules. That power alone means you must have more trust in that person than is required for any other player in order to ensure a smooth game.
That example was hogwash because if it's player-questioning-DM... then you have a deeper issue than this ruling. If it was DM-questioning-player, then the DM handled it wrong anyway (the DM does know what spell the player was going to cast, if he or she so chooses; the player has no such reciprocal expectation of the DM, hence why the DM is in a position of trust) AND YOU HAVE A DEEPER ISSUE THAN THIS RULING.
Everybody divided the authority. Everybody got different dos and donts. The GM is one of the most constrained roles as its focus is entirely driven by how it relates to the others. His NPC are not HIS character to play like. PC is that player's character to play.
I as soon as the GM steps out of line, he can be called just the same.
And yes that example was a case of a bad trust failure and a gm who handled it wrong and a pkaler who reacted badly... Answr by player should have been "no" or "thats an inappropriate question for the table during play. Seem me afyer the game."
But trust is not earned or derived by power level. Its gained or lost by action
Sent from my VS995 using EN World mobile app