iamlibertarian

4 hours ago, massey said:

 

Ah, I see.  I read the thread a few days ago, didn't comment, and then reread the first post yesterday and commented.  Had forgotten all the other details.

 

Make the base extradimensional.  XD Movement, usable by other, to place where the base is located.  Buy your own scanning equipment transdimensional, and assume that other people don't.  The XD Movement doesn't actually have to be to another dimension, special effect wise.  Just define it as "super duper protected from outside scanning".

Yeah, I like that. Or, other dimension could be one which is just slightly out of phase with 'reality'. Can be seen, but needs an extradimensional power or portal to enter/leave/affect. But if I remember correctly, it would have to be usable as attack to place the house there. But that is easily done.

Still, in my case, I have to build it in a way which fits into a VPP. So unless you have a better way, I would have to pay for it as a Summon within the VPP, but without a Focus it still wouldn't have to pay the Specific Being cost? Hmmmm...

I understand why summoning a specific object is more expensive (Slavishly Devoted) since it already has to do everything the Summoner wants. But it can get prohibitively expensive to have it be a Specific 'Being' (another +1).

I can see a Specific Being costing +1 because it is a sentient being who can resist on arrival (contest of wills). But if a character merely wants to summon his Sword of Smiting Evil (his main focus for the bulk of his powers), forsaking summoning any other sword, should it cost so much to be able to summon it? I know, the argument might be that a simple Cosmetic Transform: Instant Change with some mystical or metaphysical SFX. But what if, like for Thor, his Hammer really isn't there, and he needs to Summon it to him? Or a CyberMage leaves his special laptop in the teams Van to keep it safe, but suddenly needs it? Should it really cost a full +2 (+1 Slavish, +1 Specific Being) if he wants to build a Power to summon it?

What do you think of separating Specific Being from Specific Object, and making a separate advantage: Summon Specific Non-Sentient Object (+1/2)? Between Slavish and this modifier it is still (+1 1/2).

I want to know what y'all think of this possible variation of Summon Specific Being.

"Specific Being: Partial Summon +1/2 (Probably needs a better name - Maybe: Lesser Summon Specific Being?)

This advantage calls out to a specific being with whom the summoner has significant previous interaction or previously summoned. The Summon only calls to this specific being, opening a portal to them as an invitation. The summoned being may choose to accept or refuse the Summon (like a Mage calls to his demon master, or a Priest to his God). The Summoned being also has the option of sending a representative instead (lesser demon, angel, etc. Once the being arrives, the Summoner may choose whether or not to enter into a contest of wills to force a number tasks, or merely have a conversation or negotiate. All other rules of Summon and Specific Being apply."

This gives the Summoner the choice to call for a specific being and hope it is answered, but at least gives an opening for a creature who may not have a Transdimensional Power to come to wherever the Summoner is. This allows a developing role-played relationship between the two.

Examples beyond the demon calling his master or priest his God could be:

A summoner has a favorite Pegasus she rides into battle and always wants that one. If that one has been treated well and wishes to answer the Summon, it can. If not, the call is still out there and another generic Pegasus may chose to answer the call.

A challenge. A "good" character can call a demon he has battled before so they can battle again. If the specific demon, concerned about losing, chooses to not answer the summon or sends a demon of lower rank that it in its place, it may 'lose face' with the other demons.

3 hours ago, massey said:

Buy Mind Link for your transmissions.  Buy Radio Hearing (whatever they call it now) to pick up receptions.  Don't overcomplicate things.

Believe me, I love the concept of not over complicating things. But in this case, it isn't specifically communications I am trying to protect. The character is a bit paranoid, and is Hunted (Watched) by both the government and a couple of smaller groups. They know the Base is there (if nothing else, so does the whole town, as too many weird, mystical things happen around there). She rather wants to prevent spying on the inner workings(or at least try to). I mean, she has built traps around the place and the like (see, paranoid, lol).

11 hours ago, theinfn8 said:

If all your worried about is it being difficult to find, you can have the Sanctum Sanctorum buy Concealment and run it up to something high (21-?). This would mean the base rolls against the skill of the person trying to find it, with the higher success winning (check 6E2 pg. 190 under perceivability). It wouldn't be perfect defense (is that really much fun anyway?) but it would have the same effect without the cost.

 

Anti-Location Sigils: Concealment 21- (39 pts). With the base discount: Real Cost: 4 pts.

This is an excellent concept. Thanks!

You know, its funny. This character I am building can Easily take down a Jet at 30,000 feet with the blink of an eye and wave of her hand. But she can't put a Barrier around her house/base even with 0 pts in all defenses, lol.

3 minutes ago, Greywind said:

The walls are Barriers to whatever you want barriered. TV/internet/whatever gets piped through the cable.

That's true...however, a 100m Barrier (25m per side of the Base) is more than my little (lol) VPP can manage.

2 hours ago, theinfn8 said:

Hope that helped! 

So here is how I ran it. Two 'spells'. Good until dispelled:

1) Blinded Eye:  Darkness to Scrying to Hearing and Radio Groups, Detect, Infrared Perception, Spatial Awareness and Ultraviolet Perception 13m radius, Persistent (+1/4), Personal Immunity (+1/4), Selective Target (Proper Guests of the House; +1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (139 Active Points); OAF Immobile (Sanctum; -2), No Range (-1/2), Requires A Roll (Magick Roll; Casting/Changing Spells; -1/2), Limited Power Magick Only (-1/4)
** 6E1 109 says "Sensory Talents" are just all just that, Talents (Bump of Direction, the Absolutes, etc.) and are all subsets of Detect.

2) Blinded Eye:  Darkness to Scrying to Clairsentience and Mental Groups, Danger Sense and Combat Sense 13m radius, Persistent (+1/4), Personal Immunity (+1/4), Selective Target (Proper Guests of the House; +1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (117 Active Points); OAF Immobile (Sanctum; -2), No Range (-1/2), Requires A Roll (Magick Roll; Casting/Changing Spells; -1/2), Limited Power Magick Only (-1/4)

That should cover it all, right (at least until Dispelled or Drained)? I mean, there is a way around everything (as there should be). But it should be generally good against basic spying.

Thanks!

17 minutes ago, theinfn8 said:

This is actually covered in the Equipment Guide (in more general terms). Basically, if the transmissions are completely undetectable, you apply the Invisible Power Effect advantage to the sense ability tied to the radio receive/transmit. Season the special effect to taste. There is a second option discussed that gives a more "this is highly encrypted" feel to it, but I can't recall what it is.

 

In short, yes. I was starting down an AoE-based Invisibility rabbit hole on this, but the KISS answer is, Selective (+1/4). Since Darkness is already AoE, you tack that advantage on and just simply choose to let anyone inside the AoE be immune to the effect. Which can include yourself. People outside of the Darkness are still affected in the same manner that they would be normally and that actually answers both questions. Unless you want a personal "can't read my aura" or "can't be tracked with scrying", then it might be better to use Invisibility with a "Mystic Senses" sense group, or some such. But it's after midnight and I'm not going to put more brain power into it ATT.

 

Hope that helped! 

It does! It at least gets me much closer to the solution, if not all the way there.

Basically, we have a base with multiple characters inside. We want to resit or defeat scrying upon us within the base (mystically, tech, etc.). But we still want to watch TV and surf the internet and make calls, etc.

In the case of transmitting out (like the 'calls'), if they capture our signal after it leaves the field, so be it. That's on us.
 

So, Darkness to Scrying, make the Area cover the base, add Selective (because I am assuming Selective can be applied to the equipment as well as characters).

Thanks! Good to know.

Can Differing Modifiers be used in a VPP? 6E doesn't seem to say either way. Though Designer seems to give me trouble doing so (HD Docs doesn't mention it at all.)

Thanks!

DC

On 3/10/2020 at 11:28 AM, unclevlad said:

massey, he doesn't want "open any lock."

 

He wants to bypass any form of security system, no matter how sophisticated, no matter the nature.  And do it with a finger snap, pretty much.  Sure, systems can be bypassed...but that's talking what kinds of rolls, how many, and taking how long?  With what kinds of support tools?  

I want to bypass any form of security system IF the character has enough power to do so.

On 3/10/2020 at 11:28 AM, unclevlad said:

How tough a Security Systems roll would you make breaking into a highly classified lab doing highly dangerous and/or highly illegal work?  How many layers of security would it have?  Me...it'd be pretty high. 

So to crack it that fast, without the usual support tools implicit in skills use...that's at least making the roll by 5, wouldn't you say?  So we're talking mimicking a 23- skill roll, maybe a 25-?  And potentially both security systems and lockpicking simultaneously.  So someone who wanted to build a Master Thief would be sinking HOW many points into doing this?  And those are dedicated *character* points.  

Except she would not be 'picking a lock' or using 'security system skill' to do so. Your own suggestion of mind control electronics shows that those skills and rolls are not needed -directly-. There is a roll of course, and the INT (in place of EGO) of the dice is based on the sophistication. But IF you have enough dice, Poof, you are through. Though security skill Might be complimentary to the Spell.

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

A couple more quick points...

And, I Am taking your advice and taking the Red END 0 out of the VPP and building it specifically into the spells for which it is appropriate. It is a lot of work, one of the few things that takes more work in Designer than if it were on paper I think (but will be worth it in the end - no pun intended).

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

A couple more quick points...

 

--many GMs won't want to play at this kind of power level, as it's a lot more work for them, and it's very limiting in many ways.  Obstacles are hard to define, for example, because the characters have so many more workarounds available.    Or the GM has to contrive an excuse for why things won't work.  That's fine if used *sparingly* but it's very easy to overuse.

Cannot disagree with you. She is the only character I am working on at this level.

Quote

--building a character at 600 points is going to be quite different from starting from, say, 400, and gradually adding on.  The latter is going to be much more organic;  you take what feels right at the time.

Again, cannot disagree.

Quote

So rather than build full sheets, build concepts. 

The only reasons I build ahead of time are: 

1) I haven't found a game in years. So character creation is the only fun I get to have with the game at the moment.

2) Since I haven't been able to find a game in years, character creation is a way for me to understand and remember the rules so I will be at least somewhat ready to play on the off chance I ever find a game.

Quote

 

--GMs are going to be very leery about a boatload of blanket limitations.  You have, for example, gestures, incants, and focus.  That's a total of -3/4.  How often should the GM deny you by slamming one or more of those....Darkness to Sound kills incants (in D&D), an Entangle to kill gestures, take the focus away.  The more you put onto these....especially when it's often not a functional limitation (you can buy your Armor with this to have an effectively larger VPP, for example), the more the GM *has* to enforce the limiting aspect.  A corollary here is, it can become selfish...the focus is on you to the detriment of everyone else, too much of the time.  Typically this happens with Complications..a DNPC 14- can be an example.  If the other PCs have to frequently react to support you while dealing with this, it's something that gets old REALLY fast.  When you've got such a huge amount of your character sheet impacted by these limitations, that pretty much has to be the case.  The focus isn't on the goup, it's all about you.

I fully expect that the 'bad guys' will learn her limitations with frequent exposure, just like they would for any member of the team. So I am not worried about that.

I would also fully expect that even if I find a game, on the off chance it happens to start at the 600pt level, other characters would have all those same issues, so there would be balance. And I don't take, for example, DNPCs like that, personally. Like in this character's case, she has one husband who is frequent and has a few useful skills, and two children who are infrequent, and Someday will have useful kills, but not now. And their home is about as safe as it can get (for the power level of the game). The husband is only 15pts, and the kids Together are only 10. The GM can throw them into them  mix easily or not, as the GM sees fit. 

Believe me (or not, lol) at least in the past when there was a game to be had, I learned how to both build and play characters that will Not take away from everyone else's fun, as long as we are all around the same power level.

For example, here is a type of spell I like to create (with the RED END being taken out of the VPP) just for fun.

"Aid Battery (Recharge Batteries - Ritual):  Aid 6 1/2d6, Any END Battery (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per Minute; +1), Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per Minute; +1) (156 Active Points); One Use At A Time (-1), One Use At A Time (-1), Only Restores To Starting Values (-1/2), Requires A Roll (Skill roll; -1/2), Extra Time (Full Phase, -1/2), Requires A Roll (Skill roll; -1/2), Limited Power Only END Batteries, not all END (-1/4), Extra Time (Delayed Phase, -1/4), Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4), Limited Power Only Magic (6E1 410) (-1/4), Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4), Limited Power Only Magic (6E1 410) (-1/4)"

And she doesn't even have an END Battery. This is to help the other characters do Their thing. So I don't like to make characters who the game becomes all about them.
 

Again, I realize, if I even find a game, it will be highly unlikely to be able to find one of this power level, much less be able to slip her in as my first character. I am just having fun building her in the meantime, and appreciate all the great advice on how to get her right

2 hours ago, unclevlad said:

And it's 120 BEFORE 0 END.  So it's 24 dice of Blast, all day, every day.

In a 600 point game, the bad guys would have the same, and this *specific* character has that level. She is certainly not being created to fit a low level game. (Plus, I take specific limitations on most of her spells to make them less effective, and call them her 'Ritual version' of those spells, because if she casts a spell without using that version, it can force her to Accidentally Change into a version of herself which is good for nobody, especially her, lol.)

3 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I find that making a character to fit the campaign works far better than presenting a character in the hopes they'll work in the campaign.  If I were your GM and found during the character vetting process that you'd made the guy before knowing my guidelines, I'd be much more critical of the character.  If it got vetoed, I'd also be likely to force you through a group character brain-storming session so whatever replacement concept you brought had enough chefs stirring the pot that you couldn't be bringing another prefab. 

All good points. But here is my thought. I am building it in Designer, so of course my plan would be to sit through a game watching, and speaking with the GM about guidelines, make changes as appropriate, and then submit it before the next game for approval, with being created in Designer allowing such corrections to be made (relatively) easily..

3 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I'll also point out that it's a VPP, so:
- You can put down "Spell of Unlocking: Not sure how to build this, please help!" and use it as a get-to-know-the-gm conversation.

Very good point. I would/will probably do that for things I cannot resolve. But by coming here for advice, I at  least cut back on the number of those the busy GM will have to do that with.

3 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

- A number of GMs are very leery of letting fresh faces use VPPs because they've got an awful tendency to stall games in the hands of people not ready to whip something up by the time they need to show the write-up. 

Having played Hero System in the past, I design my characters with the thought in mind that pretty much all the characters can use the VPP for a pre-approved spells to avoid that problem. I even create the powers in the VPP with several power levels ahead of time in case the character wants to lower the RC and power level of the spell, just to avoid these delays.

3 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

- A 120+ AP VPP is going to be sending warning bells left and right, you really might want to be more conservative if you intend to submit this character before getting to know the GM. 

Also a good point. However, for *this* character I would only submit her for games built for that level in the first place. Should I be lucky to find a game (its been years) I have characters created of different types for various levels of play.

The reason I don't wait to find a game to do character creation is *because* it has been years since  I could find a game, and I enjoy character creation almost as much as I do playing the game.

2 minutes ago, tombrown803 said:

talk to the GM. He might allow it in this circunstance

He might...now if only I could find a game...I am trying to have a character set up in advance that will be generally accepted, without having the character sheet laughed at and given to the dog to pee on, lmao.

6 minutes ago, tombrown803 said:

how about just buy lockpicking, security systems, and computer programing with a high skill roll. That might be the easiest way to do it

Now if only those were available in a VPP (the character is a witch...), and I am trying approach the D&D effect: Knock

12 hours ago, massey said:

You guys are crazy.  5” of Teleport will get you through any locked door, even massive vaults.  Or just take Desolidification and walk through it.  End result is the same.  You don’t need some 150 active point monstrosity of a power.

But I want the character to be able to unlock Any lock. Small chest, small combination lock built into a wall, briefcase lock, etc. If it is not possible or too difficult, so be it, but I at least have to ask...

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

You don't need to worry about the math with HD.  Start by slapping the 0 END advantage and whatever else, then start buying up the dice.  

You are probably right. Maybe I will...like I said, after I am done with the character. I am having too much fun with this 'mode' I am in

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

 I'm not sure if I"d treat Extra Phase as Phase, or Turn, for purposes of the time chart...the Extra Time limitation is much more fine-grained, but it's also intended for combat-time casting, NOT non-combat casting.

Oh, I am not counting that Extra Phase as part of taking extra time toward improving a roll. That is just part of her Schtick. She has two types of spell. Ritual, and non-ritual. Everything she does during a ritual spell has (at least) that Extra Phase for the Casting of the spell. When she does non-ritual spell (those without limitations), she has a chance to turn into a mean, nasty, angry version of herself (left over from her Buffy the Vampire Slayer days). Schtick. If she did anything with extra time to improve a roll, it would be in addition to that Extra Time limitation.

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

And...you're trying to build a VPP with effectively a 170 point control cost?  Even if it's 112 with the common 0 END modifier, that is seriously, incredibly HUGE.

Maybe so, depending on the level of the game you are playing. For example, the game she is being created for is, say X-men level, where a tornado Storm creates *will* take a plane out of the sky, not just muck with its direction, speed, and turn mode. She isn't being created for a Superman flies in the opposite direction of the earth and turns back time level, but a lot more than Change Environment is the highest level of weather control you can buy kind of game. It's a 'you can buy Invisibility to cover Everything game level, not a you can buy Invisibility to only two sense groups kind of game.

(And just for the record: In this instance it's a Control of 180 *with* the Red END 0 on the VPP. 120 without.) Aww hell, maybe I get off my ass and take the time and effort to remove the Red END from the VPP now, before I come up with even more powers to put in the VPP, saving myself more time later, lol.

30 minutes ago, sinanju said:

I'd use Tunneling, with the Limitation/Special Effect that it only works on existing doors/windows/gates/etc. Whenever you want to go thru a door, hey--it's unlocked! How conveeeeeenient. Then I can close it behind me (the "fill in behind" option for Tunneling) and my pursuers can't follow me.

OMG I love it! So much simpler (and cheaper, lol). I would still have to build the compound power so that it doesn't set off alarms if I made the SFX target the lock itself. But if I did it on the natural portals you mention, there is already a power in Champions Powers (CP 267) Shrink Tunneling, which would allow just that.

Or I could even just Desolidify the portal (UAA) with a Time Limit, limited to those portals.

Thanks!

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

I grew pretty tired of "magic can do ANYTHING!!!" some years ago, personally.  

I have always liked playing Wizards, in any genre/game system. I would create Dr. Strange specifically if I was playing in a high enough level game. Hell, if it was a completely magic free HERO system game, I would be the gadgeteer, lol. If the GM doesn't like those, it probably isn't the campaign for me. No biggie.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

And, no, it's not costing you any points.  It's a VPP power...not even a multipower slot.  So sure, you paid for it in the control cost...and I'd double check those.

I use Hero Designer so that my entire creation process is not all about me performing math, lol.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

 

 

 Build the power completely outside the VPP, as a Combined Power, and see what your Active is. 
 

I have done so, multiple times. When the power slot I buy is at its Greatest, it allows for only one slot, maybe 2, to be active, then the character has to go through the process of changing slots to do something else (which I why I also create the powers at lower levels as well). To me, that is a valid trade off, especially when I pay for something through the VPP (in this case Red END), which means even naturally 0 END powers have their RP increased when they don't have to. Basically, I could make those naturally 0 END powers even more powerful if I would take the time and effort to apply Red END to them individually. I am paying more for the VPP for many powers which do not even get a bonus for it. To me, that is a valid trade off.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

Is your Control big enough?  The Control size you buy is the max # of active points. 

Yes. According to Hero Designer.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

And, yes, this IS a combined power as they're having to be cast together...so building them separately in your VPP will break down. 

And that is how I bought it, was as a Compound Power.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

This is something I've learned thru building a lot of char sheets...sometimes it's best to build the powers as a point of reference, THEN structure the VPP or MP around them, and adjust as needed.  For example, I like doing Fantasy Me...in the real world.  Characteristics, some defenses, life support, probably regen...and something like a 125 point VPP with 50 Control.   Half phase to switch, keep the skill roll because that's a limitation you can throw onto the powers so you can fit more in.  

I have done that too, in a Heroic or lower level game.   But in a Superheroic game, where the characters and evil NPC can kill or capture 'normals' with but a thought, I find it easier to create a concept (like a lower leveled Dr. Strange) and then build the powers to fit the concept.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

When you're taking gestures and incants, how is taking more time improving your ability to cast the spell? 

I can't remember where it is in the rules to quote a page, but there is a rule somewhere that says that if you take more time can give your rolls bonuses. Specifically for gestures and incantations, there are two ways they can be purchased: required throughout casting (which would 'build the power' during casting and make you much more noticeable as a target), and not required throughout, which would make you less noticeable as a target, for a lower -limitation. With this specific spell, I took without 'throughout.' So the gestures and incantations are not 'building the power of the spell', they are just required to make the spell possible in the first place.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

Plus, remember, even if allowed you're only getting +1 per step down the time chart.  What's the baseline time to hack a lock?

Hack a lock, sure. As for the baseline time, I don't know. But this is not 'hacking' a lock. This is using a power to 'poof' open a lock, much like, "Knock" in D&D.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

  The example on 6E1 p. 59 is pick a lock...easier, IMO, and faster...and gives it a turn.  Well, if you want +6 to the roll...you're at a day.  And that's still...HOW tough a skill roll?

Maybe that is where we are misunderstanding each other. The Magic Skill Roll is to 'get the spell off''. Some complications would of course interfere with that skill roll (loud noises and distractions, being shot at, and the like. But complexity of the lock should not interfere with the roll to cast the spell. Take using a powered suit of armor to Blast someone for instance. If the blast requires a roll to make it fire, the complexity of the targets defenses do not affect that roll. Once you have gotten the shot off, the complexity of the targets defenses only determine whether or not or how much damage you do. Now, in the case of Transforming a lock, once you achieve whatever is used as the BODY of the lock, Poof! It is unlocked. If you use Control Machine, once you have achieved the level of whatever you determine the EGO (or more likely the INT) of the lock, Poof! it is unlocked. The complexity of the lock affects how much EGO (INT?) the lock has, but not the ability to get the spell off.

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

I'm also gonna suggest again, drop the 0 END from the VPP itself.  Just try it.  This is a one-off;  you hardly care about the END, but you DO care about the Active, and that in turn will affect several aspects.

I agree with you on this. I do not care about the END on a naturally 0 END power, and I do care about the Active Points of each spell. But I freely admit that when I have 0+ potential spells (a lot of that is in different power levels of the same spell), I am lazy, and I would rather put it on the VPP than calculate it into each individual spell on which it would make a difference, even if it costs me level of power of the spell/more Active Points.

Who knows... since I haven't been able to find a reliable game (lasting more than a session or two) since 4th Edition, once I am finished building this character, maybe I Will go back and take the Red End off the VPP and apply it where appropriate to each individual spell. But in the meantime, I am having too much fun just creating the character to fit the concept (in this case Willow nearly 20 years and lots of experience) after Buffy the Vampire Slayer has ended).

1 minute ago, unclevlad said:

 

5 hours ago, Tom Cowan said:

how about skill levels as a power, lock picking at 150 would unlock most locks

But except for very few cases, skill levels don't belong in a VPP. And, that wouldn't allow the 'silencing'  (no transmission from the lock to the security computer. Otherwise I would love it.

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

To extend the thought...to handle REALLY good systems, I'd require Mind Scan, to *find* the actual computer you need to control.  It's connected to the door but it's not in the door.  I'd also require Computer Systems or Security Systems to see about access logging, and what countermeasures might be in place to block simple hacking.  Serious security starts by analyzing potential threats...and they take their sweet time in doing so.  So, a simple hand-wave, boom, we're in...that doesn't work for me. 

If the lock is a sophisticated bio lock, it is a separate small dedicated computer. If one wants to control all the locks in a facility, yeah, I totally agree. If one is standing directly in front of the bio lock, machine control should be able to affect just that one computer.

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

Secondary point:  I'd be SERIOUSLY disinclined to allow most of those limitations.  They don't matter;  this is an out-of-combat power.  

Requires A Roll (Skill roll; -1/2), Limited Power Only Magic (6E1 410) are on the VPP itself. Skill roll to even get the spell off in the first place makes sense to me. And 'Magic Only' on all powers in the VPP gives the Magic SFX, so in this case if a lock is protected against magic, that is an additional defense against the 'Knock'.

Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4), Extra Time (Delayed Phase, -1/4), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4), are 'combat' if you are trying to keep hidden what you are doing so as to not get caught (such as trying to surreptitiously trying to break into a place). Gestures and incantations attract attention, extra time is more time to get caught, and Concentration is when someone is trying to shoot at you while you are trying to get through a door to a safe place.

IIF (Symbol of Hecate; -1/4) is something you have to have to even cast the spell in the first place.

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

Oh, and the skill roll would be at -17 as you have it written....you have to cast em both together, and there's 170 active.  Got a 30- skill roll?

No, some, but not that much. But this is where taking even more time to gain bonuses to your roll comes into play, again, increasing your chances of either getting caught, or gets you shot at more while trying to get the door open to get into a safe place.

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Last:  Magic Only is a VPP limitation, affecting the control cost.  IIRC, it doesn't reduce the real cost of powers in the VPP. 

6E 410:  "Slightly Limited Class of powers available (for example, Only Magic)" thereby giving an additional SFX which can be defended against. Like if the locks were protected against magic. Plus:

"The third type of Limitation affects the powers bought through the power Pool. This sort of Limitation is taken for both the Control Cost and for any powers built with the power Pool. Again, it is just another SFX which can be defended against. It has to be on the 'spell slot' as well to give that SFX which can be defended against.

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

Probably not significant right now, with the other limitations. 

True, it isn't significant Real Cost-wise at least. Very little RC benefit while giving that SFX which can be defended against. And since it has to be there...

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

And just looking?  5d6-1 Severe is 70;  you have +1 total advantage.  Even with just the +1/2 Improved Results Group, you're looking at 105 Active. 

Yep, expensive. But this character is being designed for a high level game; a 500-600 point level game. Not a Thor level or Superman level of later Flash level game, but definitely not a Heroic level game either.

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

As a general rule, it's a very bad idea, as well, to put 0 END as a common modifier on the VPP.  Hero Designer will, I think, bounce powers that don't cost END to begin with, as they can't fit within the framework.

The power was built with Hero Designer 6, as well as all the other 'spells' I have created (including ones which are 0 END to begin with, so no they don't get bounced. What it does is give me individual spell slots that cost more AP and RC, and add penalties to skill rolls, even if Red END doesn't apply. Ie. I am paying even more for the spells which are 0 END to begin with than I need to. I only did it that way to save time and energy on Math, lol.

5 hours ago, unclevlad said:

If I allowed this...it would either be in a more limited form, or it would cost.  You're trying to bypass any type of security system, at almost any level of effort...even a tech genius' system designed with a 22- skill roll.  Sure, the D&D spell does it...but the only locks they anticipate are physical ones, or magical.  Magical locks...in 3rd Ed, the last I'm very familiar with, it'd be a caster power check.  Physical locks, yeah, no problem.  But it's the electronic ones that get me.

Well, at least my version Costs, lol. But, if magic...uhhh...mystically unlocks physical locks, why not 'mystically' unlock electronic locks as well? I could certainly see a GM imposing skill roll penalties for the highly crafted 22- skill roll electronic locks.

Or maybe it could be a simple TK with fine manipulation. If all you are doing is a simple physical manipulation. Any difficulty penalties would be based on how complicated the lock is to maneuver (a simple bar across the door would be easy, vs having to move 3 items out of the way to allow the bolt to be undone, like a key lock), with knowing how locks work being a complimentary skill.

If TK was the first 'spell', the second one would be something that prevents the lock from sending a signal to the security computer which runs the lock and/or sets of the alarm.

Quote

BUT...considering the "caster power check"...I wonder if a Suppress is better than a Transform, for complex locks?  Keep something like a 2d6 Severe Transform for the physical locks, but serious ones might be Suppress.  And I'm not sure a Transform or Suppress is correct for the sensors.  No...come to think, for this, I'd require Mind Control (class of minds:  machine).  That's why it's there.  In fact, for any electronic-based lock, that's all you need.

I like Mind Control: Machines. It can either be used on the security computer controlling the lock directly, or on the lock itself - the lock itself being a small computer; it is a separate computer anyway which just happens to be in contact with the main security computer, so you just 'mind control' it to not send that signal.

Quote

So I'd definitely NOT allow a Transform to do everything.  

I don't disagree - but it does happen to be a 'catch-all' power when you can't come up with a better way to create a legitimate comic power. Which is why I asked if there Is a better way.

Quote

If you're duplicating Knock, BTW, why would it re-lock?

I use Hero Designer, and that is just the way it lays the power out. Re-lock is the 'heals back by'.