What's helped me get a grip on DW combat is the idea of blocks and justifications.  When the GM places a block, he's deciding "you can't do this thing in the fiction until you give me a reason why" and the player respond with a justification on how he bypasses the block, which could be purely a descriptive fictional action, or it could be a move.

The block could be a duelist's guard; the player can't just Hack and Slash his enemy until he breaks the guard.  The justification could be Spouting Lore about a weakness in his style or Discerning Realities and asking "what here is not what it appears to be?" to see how his stance is poised to parry your attack, or maybe a Defy Danger (Dex) to invite his parry and evade his riposte, leaving him open.  Or just saying "I lure him to that weak spot in the floor he doesn't know about (that I already do), then when he stumbles, I go for him".  Its up to the GM what seems like a good justification.

Some monsters could raise a block as a move, like the duelist going into his guard.  They might get to do their block once, and when the players overcome it, the protection is gone.  Or it might be something they can put back in place later with another move, perhaps when weak hit or miss gives an opportunity.  Of it could be something that automatically goes back in place once the window of opportunity the justification gave closes.  For example, the dragon is covered in thick scales.  A move that justifies a strike at its belly or eye could allow an attack, but after that  the dragon recovers and the block goes up again, until the players find a new justification.

This probably isn't very revolutionary thinking, but I've found it helpful to formalize the ideas in my own mind as a way to think about both monster moves and the situation on a battlefield.  And it lets me save the custom moves for noteworthy monsters.

Talk in the "Are the book monsters useful" thread reminded me of something that continues to confuse me somewhat.  How do you use defensive monster moves?  In cases where its all-or-nothing, like a dragon's scales that are impervious to ordinary weapons, that's easy, you just deny their move.  But suppose your Ninja has "Leap out of the way of an attack with incredible agility" or your Duelist has "Parry and riposte with elegance and skill".

In a traditional system, this would raise their defenses or give you a penalty or something.  You could make a custom move that does something similar, but assume you just want it to be a normal monster move.  Presumably you don't want to let a player make a move, be successful, and then invoke the monster move to negate them ("Hack and Slash, 10!" "He leaps clear."  "Boo!")  That would be pretty lame for the player.  Would you use it like the dragon's scales, and deny them the use of their attack moves until they do something to pin down the bouncy ninja or break the duelist's guard?

I guess my confusion is in the fact that, fictionally, the ninja isn't so agile he can't possibly be hit, or the duelist isn't so great that no swordsman could possibly break through his parry.  It's just supposed to be harder to do.  Whereas the dragon is just immune to plain old steel.

I've been turning this issue over in my head planning for a Bloodstone Idol run with some friends.  I figured Grundloch would conjure himself a protective shield or something once trouble starts, but I wasn't sure what that would mean, mechanically.

The wording of the Outstanding Warrants move has always confused me.

When you return to a civilized place in which you've caused trouble before, roll+Cha. On a hit, word has spread of your deeds and everyone recognizes you. On a 7–9, that, and, the GM chooses a complication.

So on a hit, people know and recognize you.  Shouldn't that be a bad thing?  If there are warrants out for you, don't you want to lie low and avoid recognition?  At first I assumed that Charisma was actually detrimental, making it harder to go unnoticed, but nothing bad happens on a 10+, only on a 7-9.  And on a miss...you're not recognized?  Which is bad?

Speaking of bards, an obvious move for them that doesn't currently exist would be one that grants additional choices from the bardic lore list.

Thanks for your advice.  Let me offer a few examples of situations I'm not entirely confident about how to resolve with the moves.  These are things that seem exciting and meaningful to me, so I'd prefer to let the dice decide.


Your companion is lying unconscious on the battlefield.  You're hunkered down in cover, and want to shoot arrows to hold back the approaching spear-wielding goblins, so they can't get to him before the cleric does.  This seems like defense, but you're not there in melee, jumping in to the path of an attack to protect your friend.  If they had ranged weapons, they could shoot back at you and you could treat it as a Defend (drawing their attacks with your fire), but they don't have any, so its one-sided.  Maybe treat it as a Dex-based Defend, where you get to pin down an enemy for each hold you spend (instead of directing their attack to yourself)?

You want to swing on a rope and kick one of the bandits off the side of a bridge, as they try to cross it.  It's an attack, but you're hoping to just knock someone out of the fight (temporarily or permanently, depending on what the bridge goes over), rather than deal your damage.  Maybe Str-based Defy Danger?

You have the disembodied heart of the evil high priest that contains his soul.  If you can touch him with it, it will go back into his body and end his immortality.  Naturally his hordes of undead are trying to hold you off.  You want to carve your way through their lines and reach him.  (I know there was an old module with this in it, can't remember which one)  There are far too many shambling corpses to just kill them all first.  Maybe require them to kill a few zombies first, then Str-based Defy Danger to break through?  Since its presumably a climactic fight, it seems like it should take more than a single roll.

Am I thinking along the right lines here?