Ranger Called Shot example in Dungeon World Guide

First off, thanks for the super helpful Dungeon World Guide.  I'm getting ready to GM my first session next week!

While I was reading the guide I noticed something in the play example that confused me, and I'm wondering if I'm missing something.  The fighter declares that he is trying to strike the automaton's arm, and does so:

Fighter: "Ha! 9 points of damage."
GM: "Wow, yeah, the thick brass armor soaks up alot of the force from your blow, but that's a lot of damage so it dents and breaks. The mechanical arm buckles in two and the Wizard falls to the ?oor gasp-ing for breath."

A second later, though, the GM denies the ranger the ability to make a called shot because the target is not surprised or defenseless.  This seems strange to me:  why does the fighter get to make what is essentially a called shot (it actually has the exact effect of a Ranger using the Called Shot class move with a 10+ targeting the arm) but the ranger does not?  Again, I think it's probably something I'm missing about Hack and Slash and melee.  Thanks!

snowden

I'm inclined to think it went this way...

The fighter hit the automaton in the arm for a whopping 9 points of damage. That's pretty significant. As an added effect to such a forceful blow, the GM had the automaton drop the mage. However, if the fighter had only done 2 points of damage, the mage would still be trapped.

So it's not that the fighter made a free Called Shot. Freeing the mage was a happy accident in the fiction that rolled out of the mechanics that rolled out of the fiction.

Does it say the Ranger can't shoot him in the arm, just that it doesn't trigger the move for when you shoot a surprised or defenseless enemy?

Again. I think you've managed to cut to the heart of my confusion, noclue.  It seems from the example and everything else I read that any character can make a called shot at any time.  After all, if a  non-ranger character says "I launch an arrow at the ogre's head, " and rolls a ten plus, it seems like the fiction would dictate some special effect, just as it occurs in the example. If this is the case, then what does the Rangers called shot do?  What's the best way to adjudicate non - ranger called shots while not marginalizing the Rangers abilities?

I don't have my book handy, but I think the called shot move has a bunch of choices listed as results. The fighter's move is just a hack and slash, with the GM adding fictional color that follows according to their principals. Sure, the automaton can't do things that require two arms now, but that's not much of a deal. It's an example of the GM being a fan of the fighter and not protecting his own stuff.

You've brought up a good question. While I don't particularly like it, the only solution I can think of is that the Non-Ranger characters don't get to make called shots with ranged weapons or spells (not skilled/trained at being precise at range). I'm pretty new to DW though so hopefully I am also just missing something.

As a side question, why does a Ranger's Called Shot to the head cause the target to "stand around and drool for a few moments?" The fiction would make sense if the Ranger was using a sling shot or throwing rocks but an arrow to the face? Maybe the arrow didn't have enough force to puncture the skull and thus only resulted in impact trauma?

Well, called shot is a move from the Ranger play book. So, you don't get it unless you've taken the move. Anyone with a bow can say "I shoot him in the head" though. You just don't get the called shot results and there's no guarantee your shot hits em in the head.

As for standing around and drooling, I assume if the arrow hit important stuff inside your head, you'd be far worse off for far longer.

This is really helpful.  I know my players, and when I ask them to tell me exactly what they are doing on an attack they usually do something that sounds like a called shot.  In many systems this is frustrating because the rules dictate that the description is less important than the mechanic, so I end up just having the character deal damage.  One of the things that excites me about Dungeon World is that the focus on the fiction totally supports this and their description will inspire me to narrate the effects of their shot.  I'm just wondering how the ranger's ability fits into this.  Maybe a better way to do called shots is a "Defy Danger" move for non-ranger characters, so that the only character who can call shots and deal damage is the ranger? 

I see no problem with that. Or just don't narrate benefits that are the same as those of a called shot. That's my real issue with the example. The automaton dropped what he was holding. Losing the arm doesn't bother me at all.

Keep in mind too that the fighter got the ersatz benefit of a Called SHot because he rolled a whopping 9 damage. If he only hit for 2 points, he probably wouldn't have saved the wizard.

On the other hand, a Ranger making a "real" Called Shot would have made the automaton drop his friend, even if he had only hit for 1hp.

The short answer: Called Shot always works. "I hit him in the arm" only works if the GM feels like it.

The long answer: The fighter's attack could easily have gone like this:

Fighter: "Bah! 2 points of damage."
GM: "The automaton doesn't even seem to notice as your sword strikes sparks off its impregnable brass armour. "

Or even:

Fighter: "Ha! 9 points of damage."
GM: "Wow, yeah, the thick brass armor soaks up alot of the force from your blow, but that's a lot of damage. You've broken some kind of piston and there's oil leaking everywhere, but it's still strangling the wizard."

However, if the Ranger had been allowed a Called Shot, you'd get:

Ranger: "Bah! 2 points of damage."
GM: "The automaton doesn't even seem to notice as your arrow ricochets off its impregnable brass armour and clatters under a table somewhere."
Ranger: "Dude, Called Shot says the target drops anything it's holding, regardless of whether I deal any damage."
GM: "...Yeah, sorry, you're right. Let me try that again. Your arrow cuts through a pipe of some kind, and oil sprays everywhere. The automaton's grip loosens, and the wizard struggles free and falls to the floor, grasping for breath. The automaton doesn't seem much fazed, though."

Please forgive me if I'm a bit numbskulled:  If the ranger rolled 7-9 on the called shot vs the automaton, do I understand correctly that he would cause no HP damage but inflicts a fictionally appropriate injury?

He'd do damage, but in the above case he only rolled a 2.

Sorry I didn't see this sooner. Yeah, you guys have the right of it: I decided 9 damage was a lot, and added the physical description as flavor to show my players that enemies aren't just a collection of hit points. Also, being a fan of the Fighter, I figured his valiant attempt to save an ally should pay off in a cool way, if he succeeded. The Ranger's Called Shot specifically says the enemy has to be caught off-guard, which the automaton wasn't. If the Ranger had pulled off a devastating attack, it'd probably look similar to the Fighter's.

That's just my style, though. No one is under any obligation to GM that way, of course. That example is actual play, so there might totally be better choices I could've made, but didn't in the moment. The real point of the exchange was to highlight, like, what it means to hurt something and how describing your attacks will get cooler results than just "I hit it for 9 damage" or whatever.