So basically you shouldn’t ever do anything other than accident kills cuz a dead body with (fiber) wire markings around his neck or a bullet hole in his head stuffed into a bin/closet would make it all suspicious, no?
That is a nice point. Why have 47 bring those if he won’t/can’t/shouldn’t use them?
Maybe not bringing them will make his pockets feel lighter, thereby making his missions easier and quicker? 
Not necessarily. You perform accident kills when you can, or rather, 47 does, and they’re not always available or viable. Or, as described in step 5, you may do something that will ruin the illusion of an accident, making it meaningless to continue it, and skip to step 6. That’s why you want to do step 6 to the letter, and always wear gloves, to keep the death “unsolved,” as described in Colorado, even though it’s obviously an assassination at that point; there’ll be no way to determine the “who.”
Because A) 47 would always bring them, professional killer that he is, to be prepared to use them if he needed to. And B) you may need to use them if, as described above, you mess up attempting an accident, or there just isn’t one available to perform that can be done while adhering to the parameters laid out in step 5, so you go to step 6 and follow those parameters as closely as possible.
1 Like
So then you contradict yourself when you say…
Sorry but you’re going both ways.
So first you say nevermind the who, then you say keep it unsolved? So you think just cuz they find a rich famous person killed, they are going to “always” suspect 47 just cuz a screwdriver was missing beside the school (Marrakech) when Strandberg was electrocuted by the light source, touching the railing in the consulate? Smh. So you’re saying they are gonna ask every single person on the map (world) if they are missing anything?
This really isn’t making any sense.
No, I’m not contradicting myself or going both ways at all, and you even quoted it. I said there will be fewer ways, not no ways, to determine something happened. When I said that, I was speaking in terms of putting everything back the way it was in regards to using items to arrange an accident. There’s no way to 100% make an accident happen and not change something that could be interpreted by a proper investigation to be tampering, but the fewer means you leave behind for that to be found, the less likely it would be.
The first paragraph you’re quoting there is in regards to direct killing, not arranging an accident. If done right, it could be made impossible for a forensics investigator to be able to interpret the info to determine who committed the act. They’ll know what happened, and possibly how, and some form of evidence to hint at some of the killer’s aspects will be found; Locard’s Principle of Exchange, one of the founding pillars of forensics, states that no two objects can physically interact with one another without leaving a trace of each other, and no object can enter a space without leaving some trace of itself and taking a trace of the place with it. So something about 47 will be found; a footprint to show what sized shoe the killer wore, maybe; the angle of the strangulation bruise on the neck, or trajectory of the gunshot, or direction of the knife slash, to tell how tall the killer was. Perhaps some residue of another area of the map 47 had been in, left near the body. But those details do not provide an identity, and so long as things like fingerprints and DNA and security footage and eyewitnesses aren’t left behind by 47, or taken with him in the case of physical evidence, due to getting on his gloves and clothes which he will immediately dispose of after the mission, they’ll never be able to make up a proper profile on the assassin who never settles anywhere.
No, I’m not saying they’re gonna find out who 47 is from missing items or ask everyone if they’re missing things. What I am saying is that, using the Strandberg example you provided, investigators know that this was a high-profile target that most everyone wanted dead, and so what looks like a mere accident could in fact have been a murder. So they are probably going to talk with anyone responsible for maintenance and find out who last worked on those lights and when, and were the wires electrifying the railing the last time they worked on them or not, as well as see who might have been in the control booth to turn the power on at the moment Strandberg touched the railing.
Obviously, these questions won’t turn up anything, and if 47 is wearing gloves, no fingerprint check of who all may have touched those lights or the railing will come back with anyone unaccounted for. However, one such person may report, if asked about anything unusual or out of the ordinary that they can remember about that day, such as seeing anyone who seemed out of place, or anything not being where it should be, they might mention that a screwdriver went missing from where they normally keep it. An investigator would probably already have realized that the right kind of tool could allow someone to deliberately tamper with the lights, and that a screwdriver was probably used by looking at how it is now, and tried to check that; it doesn’t prove anything, but it gets them thinking. If something like that is missing, it could mean someone took it after using it and this may not be an accident. If, however, nothing is taken, and everything is put back how it was, even if the investigator decides to go the extra mile and fingerprint all the screwdrivers in the building that could have performed the task, they’ll find nothing helpful, because 47 wore gloves and determining any specific screwdriver as having done the deed is practically impossible.
Examining the lights themselves is a bust, but if someone took a screwdriver and kept it, maybe someone suspicious looking like they’re there to work might be on the camera footage. They check the security cameras, which the HPP specifically says to leave running when performing an accident, and they see no one, so nothing suspicious is on camera, and nobody tampered with the footage.
So: no witnesses, nobody reporting anything out of the ordinary, nothing missing or stolen, no fingerprint or DNA checks providing anything useful, no security footage tampered with and nothing found on that footage. All these things together, while probably not fully putting someone’s suspicions to rest, would lead an investigator to lean toward a likely accident, in the absence of evidence and (as far as they know) opportunity to pull off such a feat.
Now, suppose you do keep the items, or knock out an NPC in a way that can’t be shrugged off, or delete the camera footage, making it clear that something fishy happened despite an apparent accident kill. That still doesn’t lead investigators to 47; they’ve got nothing on him. All it leads them to is to know that it probably wasn’t an accident. However, 47 has a reputation to keep, plus his own desire to test his skills and challenge himself, and he would take whatever passes for pride in his work at being able to make it as thoroughly like an accident as possible, and so he would still take the steps I described to leave everything as much like it was as is physically possible in order to dissuade any investigation from concluding murder if he could help it, even if they couldn’t trace it to him. As for direct killings, that’s why he tries to do so as quietly and discreetly as possible. Although it’s not a game mechanic, I imagine in-universe that on the rare occasion 47 uses a firearm of any sort, he stops to collect any spent shell casings on the ground, just in case they could be traced to the place of purchase, or find any trace evidence or partial prints on them from when he loaded his weapon with them, likely before beginning the mission and putting any gloves on.
If you’re wondering why I bother with such intricate detail in my head while playing a simple game, it’s because I strongly considered and began pursuing a career as a homicide detective in my early twenties before realizing I didn’t have what it took to perform the job outside the actual evidence gathering and witness questioning aspects of it, and so abandoned that whole idea. I did still obtain an Associate Degree in Criminal Justice though. So when I play Hitman, it takes me back to those days, and I’m playing it like 47 knows exactly what investigators will be looking for, because it’s what I know I’d be looking for, and I have him act accordingly.
2 Likes
TL:CR
(Can’t Reply)………
Oh, c’mon, man! You can’t call down the thunder and then hide in the shelter until it’s over! You gotta stick through the storm!
(I get the feeling this is gonna bite me in the ass)
3 Likes
My headcanon for the accidents always was that they never hold up as accidents after 47 leaves the map and a thorough investigation is conducted. Multiple connected prominent people dying under suspicious circumstances in the span of an hour will obviously be perceived as a hired hit by general public, despite there not being any evidence stating so. They can be considered accidents on spot, in the moment, but not when everything’s been properly investigated. In Blood Money, even if you killed all your targets with accidents, the newspapers will still write about a mysterious assassin behind this, and I sort of liked that. After all, before BM events 47 didn’t even have that many options for accident kills.
I can say the same about any “suspicious” behaviour that doesn’t violate SA rules. As long as 47 is not witnessed committing a crime or wasn’t caught on camera, there’s nothing that connects him to the hit - and yet some people still might remember a bald stranger that looked a little out of place. It’s not like it will be of any value to authorities, as by that point 47 would have already left the country and changed identity with the help of ICA covering any legal tracks. I can’t pretend that 47 is absolutely subtle and inconspicuous, so even when going for an immersive roleplay game style there’s still a little room for some stand-out actions.
4 Likes
And that’s fair enough, and fully valid. I just take it to the next level, and I think in the 15 years since his activities in Blood Money, as he’s gotten even better over time, so would 47.
About being conspicuous: doesn’t every single hotel level involve 47 checking-in right before he kills his targets and then mysteriously disappears 
? That would definitely get attention of any investigation. And yet it’s completely plausible as it would happen days after the hit, when it’s no longer 47’s problem.
Thought I was alone in this way of thinking. It’s an cover-up for 47 while he’s still on the map, but people are surely to connect the dots in many cases afterwards, as evident from the BM newspapers.
1 Like
But remember, gentlemen (or ladies if that’s the case): it is considered an official part of the canon that nobody really remembers 47 after the fact. They remember a bald white guy in a suit, maybe, but that could be talking about pretty much a good third of them. The only time his descriptors really stood out was after the hotel fire in Absolution, because so much intense stuff was going down involving 47 at that moment with many bystanders that even he stood out a little bit in their memories, and even that was hardly anything to go off of. It’s stated in the sniper map bio for him that he’s hardly ever noticed or remembered. Canonically, 47 got silent assassin each time in Blood Money, and if I recall correctly (it’s been a while) there’s no description of him when that’s the case; in fact they say authorities have no clue to his identity because nobody has reported seeing the killer.
It’s not uncommon for people to reserve a hotel and then check out very shortly after, if they were only reserving it for a brief business meeting or something like that. There still would not be much to go off of for investigators, especially without video footage of him, and presumably the agency has a dummy account they use for booking hotel rooms for their agents that either checks out or higher-ups on their payroll tell investigators not to worry about.
So again you contradict yourself🙄
… how? 
You’re telling me I’ve contradicted myself, but not how, or even what was contradicted.
i’ve been playing similar to this for a pretty long time, i found it makes the game seem more challenging. i really like it, except for timed ETs… those i do the cheapest way i can find. 
1 Like
Thoughts on using emetic poison on nontargets? Also wondering if there are any distinctions between injected vs consumed vs grenade forms.
When necessary, use them. In-universe, it’ll be chalked up to food poisoning or stomach flu. No preferences on the method.
2 Likes
Do you bring an oxygen tank on the map to prevent breathing any air near your targets?
6 Likes
…
…
… no.
1 Like
What is this, TENET?
2 Likes