Defy Danger: Is it avoiding a threat or acting despite a threat?

... could I trouble you to give me an example of a character's response sufficient to neutralize or evade the threat that wouldn't be a Defy Danger and wouldn't be another move? In other words, can a player just as easily come up with some fiction to negate the specific threat without activating a move?

"I open the door."
"There's a goblin in the room, with a bow. He raises it and hisses!"
"I shut the door."

;)

Or are you saying that there wouldn't be a Cast a Spell roll?  That casting would be part of the Defy Danger?

No, there's definitely two rolls, here.  Making that Defy Danger roll is the mechanism behind the GM saying;

HERE IS A THING, DEAL WITH IT and the player saying NO.  I IGNORE YOUR THING.

So then you need to Defy Danger.  The move is always reactive, but is often called for when the player is reacting so that they can do something above and beyond just getting the hell out of the way.  Two rolls, in this case, but related.  It's like, you're in the middle of a situation where something is ABSOLUTELY DEMANDING YOUR ATTENTION and if right now, you don't tell me "I deal with that thing." then you are defying danger and you need to explain how.

John's example is much clearer than mine. I was trying to come up with ways to fit my example into the one I was already using but, well, simplicity is awesome.

HERE IS A THING, DEAL WITH IT and the player saying NO.  I IGNORE YOUR THING.

So then you need to Defy Danger.  It's like, you're in the middle of a situation where something is ABSOLUTELY DEMANDING YOUR ATTENTION and if right now, you don't tell me "I deal with that thing." then you are defying danger and you need to explain how.

- emphasis mine.

I think Adam has touched on something here that the examples provided have only touched on. Sage's idea of waving the chain at the ogre gets at where I'm going though.

The conversation of roleplaying DW is filled with questioning, by the GM and the PC's. This questioning provides answers which in turn establish the fiction. If the answers are nebulous or not readily apparent, a move more than likely activates in the narrative 'space', to determine where the story goes.

I think its important to extrapolate the colourful richness of the scene before diving in to a move. Players naturally do this, as it adds imagery to their narration, and sometimes comes up with something rather un-expected (like the chain with the ogre), its this lovely back and forth of detail between the players and GM.

So its more than a room with a cage and a few orcs and a released ogre. That gives you only a few hooks to hang your fictional hat on.

 You can focus on the physical space: Is the room a natural cavern? Man/dwarf/orc made? How is the cage constructed? What are the monsters wearing? How is the place lit?

You can dig down to the whys and wherefores: What do the monsters do here in this cave? Where does it lead to, who else in allowed through here?

Or you can focus on the thoughts and feelings: Why is the ogre dimwitted? Is that smaller orc the same one you allowed to escape earlier? The orc gesticulating with his claw has the dead cleric's mace slung through his rawhumanhide belt, how does that make you feel?

My rather longwinded point is that we naturally ask a lot more questions (many of which are discarded) during actual play than examples tend to show. The principle of ask questions and use the answers is so important here when a move's use or implementation is unclear. These questions are vital in determining the fiction and thus clarity of the resultant moves that arise and the consequences of the roll to the story.

So defy danger needs an imminent threat. If its not apparent, question a little more until it is or simply keep roleplaying and asking lots of questions until another move (player or GM) presents itself.

The way I've been interpreting Defy Danger is as follows:

If there is a danger or threat then the PC can:

a) Ignore it and do what he wants. This is a Golden Opportunity for the GM but the player can make his move. "You see a goblin aiming a bow at you." "I don't care about a goblin, I enter the room, look around and cast Magic Weapon on my sword." GM gets to make a hard move for the PC ignoring his threat but the PC can make his move as well.

b) Avoid it by describing how he deals with the threat or danger. This can be solved by the fiction by the PC just explaining what he does. "You see a goblin aiming his bow at you". "I shut the door." PC dealt with the threat with fiction, no move needed.

c) Act despite the danger because the PC wants to make a specific move without dealing with the threat. "You see a goblin aiming a bow at you". "I rush in and try to tackle him before he gets a shot off". The PC will have to roll a Defy Danger because he is acting despite the threat. Then he may or may not have to make another roll (maybe Hack and Slash) depending on his fiction.

Ignore, avoid, or act despite...those are the three ways I interpret threats and dangers.

The way I've been interpreting Defy Danger is as follows:

These are all good, solid interpretations of the rules.