Songs like an interesting minor hack. If I played more DW than I do, I might give it a try.

Out is certainly fun rolling d20s  :-D

In my last Apocalypse World,  my players feared horses marginally more than the vipercats and the murderfish, and I think that's largely because they never saw one, just what had been left in the wake of horses.

So, what, it's OK to have traps in the game rules for new players/roleplayers because the DM can simply fiat new mechanics to help them out¹?  If so, that's true of literally any RPG ever, with any possible bad mechanic.

Er, that's not what was said. Never was said that the GM should fiat. What was said was that if you spend years in game practising at magic, the GM should make Dungeon World feel real and give you the benefit of what you've done. Just because you haven't spent an advance on it you can't car spells  regardless of the fact that you've been studying for years? That seems odd to me.

Just because you don't like the mechanic doesn't mean it is bad, nor a "trap".

If the rule for multiclass moves leads people to ignore it because they don't like the outcome it produces, as you suggest people can do, then it is a failure of game design. What you say does not in any way support the mechanic as good design. All you're saying is that it's failure can only be so bad. And "so bad" is as bad as it can ever get.  In fairness, I'll note that what you say does not in anyway imply that the mechanic is bad, but I've already presented, other, sufficient arguments in support of that position.

I won't speak for others here, but I really don't think you've given any compelling arguments that the mechanic is bad, just that the mechanic doesn't do something you want it to, and are unhappy that the response from others isn't to agree with you, but rather to say "if you don't like it, don't run it that way."

Anyway, the difference between the multiclass moves and gaining the moves via descriptive, fiction first, positioning is exactly that: one way you get to prescriptively say, "I've learned how to cast spells," and the other way you say, "I'm going to practice magic junk every day with the wizard," and through a lot of plot and description and probably more than a few moves you eventually learn how to do magic. Maybe you get the Cast A Spell move with associated stuff, maybe you get a custom move related to hedge magic. Depends on the fiction. It's not demonstrably folk ignoring the multiclass rules, it's folk approaching the same goal differently. That's not a bad thing.

(edit: removed reference to Oberoni crap. After reading more posts on it than I care to ever again, it appears nobody knows what it actually means and it's just a catchphrase to not actually mention any formal fallacy.  Will now never mention Oberoni again, and if you want to discuss formal fallacies, actually discuss formal fallacies. Otherwise I will assume you are using a bunk appeal to authority, which while not a formal fallacy still leads to a weaker argument when your sources stuck are uncited)

The fighter has to choose between different "skins" for his signature weapon.

A typical longsword that you can buy has +1 damage. If i take Longsword as my option, do i get the +1 damage or is this just for bought weapons?

From what I understand, your signature weapon only has the benefits you give it. So "Just for bought weapons" is my call.

Do Scent of Blood and Merciless stack? If yes then how? Do i really roll 1d10 + 2d4 or
2d4*b ?

Is there any reason i should take Scent of Blood before Merciless?

Yes, 1d10+2d4, and "probably not", but I'm sure there are edge cases.

Well, I occasionally tell the conferences and ask with a "well, it'd be damned hard and you'd take -1 forward on it," but I'm trying to wean myself off of difficulty modifiers and that's my methadone. Well, that is unless there's some danger to defy to attempt it, then it's DD and then whatever unmodified.

I find that as far as fairness is concerned, simply asking everyone at one what they are doing and then resolving each of those helps with that. Otherwise, well, that's pretty much a thing when it comes to RPGs. It's a skill, making sure everyone gets their say.

Awesome. I can use this. Thanks folks ;-)

You know, I think if you take away the rolling bit and just leave the  "when you" and "choose one" parts, you might be in better territory.

"When you call on your God to heal your party, choose one:

• You are only able to heal 1d6
• Channelling the power exhausts you, take -1 ongoing until you make camp or rest
• Your god demand something in exchange, tribute or a favour. The GM will tell you what

You may not choose the same option twice in a row."

That last bit may be unnecessary, but otherwise I think taking the roll out of it removes further likelihood that the Cleric will just do it more than once at a time.