I read Elemental Mastery as "the Land is thirsty".  As in you have to open a vein and let the elemental drink in order to bind it.  And if you don't, it might do what you want, but it might do it's own interpretation...

Also:

 Can a cat pray to a god?

Bast certainly believes so.  As does Morpheus... >_>

@Murder-of-crows: Take the ranger move for spellcasting.  You can be a raw shapeshifter, or you can be a divine-casty-druid.

@tehnai: I expect there to be a section like that in the 'class moves discussion'

Hey tehnai! Welcome aboard.

Sadly, a counterproductive player isn't really the fault of the game, nor is it something any game out there can really fix.

But as to combat - yes, you can have some fast paced action, and even some pretty tactical choices.  There are plenty of APs here to choose from, but if you have any specific questions (or a scenario) toss it at us and we'll hash it out and see if we can provide examples to help.

It's funny you mention volley, since my players almost take the -1d6 option.  But then, my monsters tend to be scary as hell, and they don't have the leeway usually (it's a question of downing things quickly before the party gets ripped apart).

Hearing you say 'highlight' it sounds like you're not playing with the newer rules.  You should email Sage and Adam at gm@dungeon-world.com and they can get you the full Beta which may address some of your problems and concerns.

we use 1d4 so it's not 'the best option' for a mage past level 2.

Also, this opens it up for future moves from say ... a compendium class.

The Guardian

Move: Wall of Steel
When the target you are Defending is struck for full damage, take +level piercing forward.

Move: Retributive Strike
When the target you are protecting is struck for full damage, expend a Defend hold to deal 1d8 damage

You get the idea! :)

Yikes long writeup.  Excellent though.

In particular I like your custom moves.  The chase one is in particular very good.  I might have to yoink that >_>

As for grabbing/breaking grabs I use DD+Str.  Seems to work great.  Basically if there's no actual Danger of anything I usually just let the PC's succeed, but if there is a physical overpowerment I go with a Str roll.

There was a post here (i have to dig it up) that broke down the defy danger 7-9 set I really liked.  I don't know if I'd rewrite it (although for first time games it'd be nice for a clarification) so much as I keep that onhand to sort of clarify and keep me on point.

Something I picked up in specific other games (I use comic-panels in my head for framing in Marvel for example) is to think of it as a story. 

In a scene (movie, book or otherwise) where adventurers are being attacked by wolves in a forest, you have to sort of cut to each person, but the story is moving on.  Think about what that paragraph would sound like and let that shape what you're doing a bit.  They (meaning the characters) are certainly in the center of the frame unless there's a major villain of some sort (wolf-pack leading Lord of the Hunt), but the action isn't static.

If there's two characters in that frame, one is probably rolling an assist.

Just my personal rule of thumb.

I found the most interesting bit of things Grimdrig's commentary at the end.

WFRP3rd (which I'm a fan of) rewards positive description with white and black dice.  So if you fictionally add positioning (I dance back over the trap, hoping he misses where I step!) you get white blessing dice to add, and if the GM adds complications (but you've been drinking all last night dwarf, how's that blurry vision affecting your footing?) you add black dice to complicate your life.

However being used to this sytem and being removed from it reminds me of the feedback loop (http://www.alexc.me/a-scientific-explanation-why-diablo-3-is-less-addictive-than-diablo-2/417/).  Be creative, add fiction, get a bennie! Woo!  But in DW: Be creative, add, fiction .... no mechanical additive.  This would no doubt wear on the player.

DW is a very different game though.  Instead of using a very delineated set of rules, you tell a story together and use the rules where they apply.  It takes a little adjustment.  Also about $60 less of unique dice, and 40lbs of cards (that box is heavy).  It has strong benefits (such as more flexible class and world structure, higher player agency) but the tradeoff is that not every fictional tidbit matters.  I think it does well overall because it's not as much about player success as about a good story.  Also it moves alot faster in terms of getting things done, and story progression.

But I hear what he's saying.

GM SECTION:
I second the 'boxes' for marking things off comment.

Spouting lore and Discern Realities speed up.  When people learn the questions they know what to ask, and they don't bother rolling so much when it isn't applicable, just ask questions about details.

Cool post.

I'm starting to see what you mean by the less-than-clear bonds. What does it mean? Has that meaning changed significantly now?

Exactly.  As long as you think it's resolved (meaning either played out well enough, changed, or if it has a goal - complete) you can ask the other person if they agree.  If they agree mark XP and cross it out.  It reminds me a bit of buying off (10pt) XP with keys (such as in Lady Blackbird, Marvel Heroic or Shadow of Yesteryear).  It's a change that signals that your relationship has moved on in some fashion.

As for 3, I'm starting to see your point. If you wanted to maximize bondage, you'd be hard-pressed to use all four for the same player. Plus you can have majority votes with an odd-numbered setup.

Correct.  As a sidenote someone on these forums suggested making bonds with organizations, NPCs and so forth.  It's become sort of a driving bit of the story (and plot) in a game I'm running, and I highly recommend it.  House Rule and all that, but we've enjoyed it so far.

I've seen C&O houseruled to where it works with NPCs, and is compulsory. But as it's written, doesn't it just work for PCs only?

When you speak frankly with someone...
Ah I see your question.  The word 'player' there.  Hmm, maybe we should get Sage/Adam to reword (or clarify correctness/intent) of that.  As far as I'm concerned the GM is the 'player' for an NPC but they DO state in chapter 1 that there is the GM and the 'players' (separate entities).  So technically you're right, but I can't imagine running it any other way.