Little thought experiment here, inspired by this thread
Start very zoomed out, let's say Primetime Adventures, where the highlighted character's interests in a given scene are resolved with a single card-draw. We can play through the scene with a minute level of detail if we want, but we can also kind of skip ahead to resolution without many character choices. Once we know what you want and have any idea at all of how you're pursuing it, we can resolve. In my experience, play doesn't speed along with no detail, but it does sometimes jump to resolution as soon as we're clear on what's at stake, with whatever preceded that often being color or set-up.
Now zoom in a little more, let's say Apocalypse World. We're still looking at what my character wants and how they pursue it, but now we have some varied options or incremental steps that require decisions and can change the options before we answer "Did I get what I wanted and how'd that turn out?" For example, we can follow a sequence that's just like Dogs in the Vineyard -- start with manipulation, see how that goes; if not good enough, escalate to threats; if that
doesn't work, break out the lethal force. If my character attempts to solve every problem with immediate murder, or if my character's so good at manipulation that they never need to escalate, then perhaps this doesn't play out very differently than Primetime Adventures. There's certainly the potential, though, that we begin roleplaying and the rules interject at a more minute level.
So now let's zoom in further still. What about good old fashioned skill checks? What about attaching probabilities to every minute task you might perform en route to your goal? I may come back to that, but for now I'd like to try a different angle. Let's take the same leap from PtA to AW, one where we break "get what you want" into smaller related chunks, and apply it to AW. Let's break Seduce/Manipulate and Go Aggro and Seize by Force into the interesting decisions that push us, tiny step by tiny step, farther into commitment or animosity or moral hazard.
Help wanted! Here's my very first brainstorm:
Negotiate - agree on the terms of a mutually beneficially arrangement
Deceive - convince them of untruths that will elicit your desired response
Toy With - manipulate their emotions to the point where they're desperate to do what you want
Threaten - imply or state that lack of cooperation will be met with ugly conflict (verbal at the very least)
Manhandle - push them, corner them, knock them down, grab them, hit them without intent to injure
Coerce - promise death or worse to them or their loved ones for non-compliance
Attack to Dominate - achieve complete control over them
Attack to Wound - hurt them but don't kill them
Attack to Kill - kill them