Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack,misc.misc (
More info?)
Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> Kent Paul Dolan wrote:
>> As systems have gotten more informal, the original
>> restriction of wizard-mode to use only by the owner
>> of /usr/games makes less and less sense, and
>> probably the DevTeam should fix that to make the
>> current "game workings testing" mechanism accessible
>> to unprivileged users, by decoupling the "-u wizard"
> Am I misunderstanding you?
Yes.
> I read that as a proposal to let any user use
> wizard mode, thus being able to (e.g.) create tons
> of bones that affect the games of the other
> players.
You are confused about precisely the things that are
the issue here. The "wizard mode" for Unix and the
"wizard mode" for NetHack are now two profoundly
different things, and they need to be disambiguated
by being split into two different facilities.
Unix "wizard mode" is all about being able to
install and uninstall games, grant and revoke user
privileges, mess with wrapper scripts and records
logs and upgrades and backups.
NetHack "wizard mode" is all about being able to set
up any situation internal to the game, and test some
"what if" situation.
The two couldn't be more different, and they need to
be split, to give Unix multi-player systems NetHack
players the same "NetHack wizard mode" internal game
testing privileges that personal computer NetHack
players already enjoy, without having to set up a
special separate account "wizard" to exercise those
privileges, since that account name is a reserved
and dedicated on on multi-user Unix systems.
>> from having to match a real account name, or just
>> let the "-D" switch suffice, reserving "-u wizard"
> You need some distinction for wizard mode if you don't
> want that every user will be able to affect the others
> games. Don't you?
Yes, but that's not the _same_ wizard mode needed
for internal game testing. The problem is that we
have two very different things, but we only have one
name for them right now. They need two names, so
that their privilege sets can be appropriately split
between those names.
>> for real multi-system manager games account needs,
>> as originally intended, which certainly doesn't
>> include game-play "what if" explorations beyond the
>> limited ones eXplore more supports.
> I think that explore mode is well enough for users on a
> _multi-user_ system to test the game.
Well, no, that creates two classes of NetHack
players, giving a hugely unfair advantage at
tournament time to those who can test stuff in
personal computer wizard mode before they try it in
the tournament, compared to those who have only Unix
access to NetHack (which, and it's how we landed in
this mess, used to be "everyone").
> Otherwise you would have to remove features from wizard
> mode, then re-introduce another mode to be able to check
> the consistent game behaviour.
Exactly right, that _is_ what needs to be done; use
the alternative name it already has, "debug mode",
or come up with a better one, maybe "what-if" mode.
> No. Exploration is one thing, wizard mode another;
> don't mix them up. IMO.
The problem is that exploration mode is a "play
without dying but otherwise pretty much an unchanged
game" mode, and should be reserved for that purpose,
but the "what-if" mode is also valuable and needs to
be made available to Unix players as it is to
personal computer players, but without the
complexities that arise now because it is muddled up
with the Unix user "wizard"'s higher set of
privileges, by what is now a historical accident but
once made perfect sense.
HTH
xanthian.