Here are the traditional reason I would say no to my players and why I shouldn't in Dungeon World:
- Because doing so would ruin my plans
- In my head, this is physically impossible or there's not enough time etc.
- Because the action would cause sudden PvP combat
Here's why I would be wrong to say no for those reasons in Dungeon World
1. Because doing so would ruin my plans
In Dungeon World, you have no personal agenda to railroad the players in your stories and your intentions. GMing Dungeon World is about letting go of selfishness and let the player be the master of their own destiny. That's hard for me because I often prepare stuff in advance and will unconsciously lead the players into my preps or simply make them happen regardless of the players' actions.
It's really hard for me coming from a Dungeons and Dragons background to let go of that. I usually plan my setting and often the players will ask me if their cool idea would work in my setting and I would often say no...no you can't play a Drow they are evil and you'll be attacked on sight in the first village you visit. No you can't play a Druid because the game is about political intrigue and a Druid wouldn't fit in the court of the king. Plus..there are no forest around the starting area to host a druid circle.
That's just bad. For some reasons it's assumed in many games that you should ask the GM if your character fits in his world. In Dungeon World you should feed from the players' ideas and background. When they asked me details about the starting area, I told them nothing more than simple stuff that wouldn't ruin their character concept. We'll be starting in a small village near the coast where pirates are constantly threatening the locals. It respects the principles of the game because those are broad strokes and it leaves place for player inputs.
2. In my head, this is physically impossible
The problem there is I would often describe the situation and the options but didn't mention some details that seemed obvious to me. By lack of description, the players will often assume nothing prevents them from doing something.
In your example, I would have asked if he understood the leader was surrounded by guards and passing through that line of defense would be dangerous. If yes, you ask how he reaches the leader. If it makes sense, you call for a move (usually Defy danger) based on the description. Description is the key and will often set the options available for the players.
3. Because the action would cause sudden PvP combat
In my games, I usually forbid the players to start physical conflict between them because the system is not balanced for players to fight other players (like 4E). Also, I think conflict would simply threaten the future of the game (read 1) so I would say: No pvp combat. Fix this out of game.
Big..mistake.
With the bond system and the way alignments work in Dungeon World I realize that player conflicts could be really interesting. I remember playing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 3rd edition and they have a party sheet with a conflict tracker. I loved it and included it in my Dungeon World game after the players playing the elf and the dwarf said they didn't like each other. I made a GM move out of it.
You are not the first GM thinking about this, and there has been quite some discussion about it on Barf Forth Apocalyptica, the forum run by Vincent Baker. All quotes below are taken from posts there. There is one thread discussing specific examples of how this move can be made real, which is where most of this insight is from.
Most MCs there play the move as written and give descriptions how to do that consistently with Agenda and Principles, and the fact that it has not changed between the first and the second edition of the game is a strong indication that it's not broken if you use it right. But given the discussions around it, I expect the 2E rulebook will contain some more insight on it, too, once it is out.
The advice given for running with “An arresting skinner” as written are
- Player's stylistic choice putting a natural limit on when it will be used,
- Movie-like spotlighting makes this seem far more real than straight narration,
- There are obvious choices for consequences of over-using the move in the real Apocalypse World.
Player's Stylistic Choice
The first thing to note is that it doesn't need to be abused like that.
The way I have seen the move limited in play: the player taking it agrees not to use it to shit all over the fun of the other players by constantly mind-controlling their characters with it. That seems to work fine.
The player does have the stylistic choice over when to use it, and they can decide to use it just in situations where they think it fits. And if you do that, you can nicely use it even for a skinner who is not a stripper.
Picture a dapper violin-cello player whipping his battered top-hat off with a flourish; the last lounge singer removing and hanging up her shawl with an "I own this place" attitude; the skinner whipping off his trademark ankle-length leather coat and flinging it over the back of the chair as he enters/interrupts the meeting. Consider that such non-sexy uses of the move might be the only way these skinners ever invoke it.
Guiding the Narration
[F]or me, this is another example of how AW mimics movie reality, not "real" reality. I don't find it necessary to consider the Skinner's power supernatural, because my group and I are creating something that flows rather like a movie. When that moment comes, and that sexy leading character is hit by those perfect blue lights and the soundtrack is awesome and the perfect body is being revealed, the plot may be in the middle of a fire or a fight scene, but for ten to thirty seconds all the camera sees - and therefore all we are looking at - is the Skinner.
In a moment we may find out that while that scene was going on, some of the other characters were doing things. So the next few player moves are like tiny "flashbacks" just going back a few seconds or minutes. That's cool, because those other characters weren't watching the Skinner scene. They were busy.
We see things like this in movies all the time. The smokin' hot protagonist drops the shoulder of their blouse, and everyone's eyes are pinned to that little patch of bare skin. The camera is pinned to it. Our shot goes medium-close, and all we see is the curve of their neck, the shadow of the clavicle. Reverse shot to the antagonist, nostrils flared, pupils dilated, lip glistening with just the smallest dot of unrestrained saliva. Shot retreats to medium distance, and we're suddenly surprised that one of the protagonist's teammates has somehow been next to the antagonist the whole time, and slits their throat!
These are the core narration options, and for these the MC needs the collaboration of the players. Personally, I did not need to go any further then this in the only game I saw use of this move.
If they are enough, that's cool – but if you still get the feeling that you need more tangible or unilateral ways of making Apocalypse World Seem Real, there are options for that, too, without sacrificing how the move works.
The Move happens in the World.
Don't make the "frozen" people be in love with the skinner; that's not the move. It's not a seduce and it's not a hypnotize. No, they KNOW that what they're doing isn't natural and the MC should tell her about how she can see that in their eyes.
In our game, the male skinner used this on a noble woman (our setting was drifted) to distract her. But she KNOWS what's going on, the way we play it. She knows she should have looked away and she knows she's being held there by how supernaturally hot he was, but she can't look away. How does that make her feel, after? She HATED him before. The MC talked at length about how she felt the need to shower. And her threat type jumped to 11, I'm sure.
And if the Move takes time and happens in a somewhat public place, Announce Future Badness:
[…] more people show up. And then more people. Dozens of people stop what they're doing and go nuts when a) the Skinner stops short or b) hits the naked zone and tries to get dressed and bug out.
Best Answer
I'd like to challenge the word "trivially" in your original assumption.
Inflicting harm is definitely not going to be quick or trivial, because even taking a single point of Harm takes days to heal. The Angel has a dedicated move (and they're the dedicated medic) and that still requires you to be "blissed out on chillstabs" for 4 days. At that rate, leveling up even once is going to deplete the Angel's Kit twice over and take about two months (3 +hx * 5XP), which means you need a ton of jingle and a very safe place to pull it off. Apocalypse World gives you neither.
Having tons of sex with the Angel works slightly better, but still takes a huge amount of time. Even if the MC lets every single act count, you still need to have sex 3(hx) * 5(xp) * 10(levels) = 150 times with every party member. That's likely going to take a few months at the least. And again; in all that time you have to be in a safe place, undisturbed, and catered for. At basically no cost, because you wouldn't be able to afford it.
Giving you the circumstances to do either of these things would violate the MCs agenda of "Barf forth apocalyptica", which would not tolerate such a place to exist easily. Also, while you're taking a multiple month long lavish vacation, whatever fronts are active will be rolling on, un-opposed. So even if the MC allows you to do this without breaking up your little party a few hours in (say, with some angry local dudes demanding their turn) you probably wouldn't even recognize the world you came out to when you finally left your hole; in Apocalypse World, things crumble quickly if not handled carefully and quickly.
So summing it up; there's no "hard" rule that says you can't do it, but all the other rules of MCing will quickly start forcing the MC to handle it, and it will be handled in a very natural fashion by the very nature of Apocalypse World.