I tried soo many times to convince myself that its okay to leave a drowned target on the bathroom floor since it still counts as SA incase the body was found
so my attempt was “perhaps it counts as SA because this person was very drunk went to the bathroom to puke slipped head first into the toilet bowl and drowned him\her self” 
but its just not working for me and I haven’t drowned a single target ever since I completed all the “hold my hair” challenges in every map.
I also dislike changing 47s cloths and i try my best to make each playthrough in any map as realistic as possible.
PS: if you have a good and logical reasoning behind why toilet drowning counts as an accident kill please let me know 
Well, I always saw it as the person passing out while having their head over the toilet, especially if they were just liking, and fell face first in the bowl and drowned before they could wake up. Especially if 47 is wearing gloves and holding them down in such a way as to avoid bruising their skin in obvious places hat makes it clear someone held them down. Either way, by the time they’re found, it’s a tragic accident.
Although, it does make more sense in Colorado when you drown Sean in the trough, or in Haven when you drown Tyson in the tub (not the other two though, there is no way anyone will believe two grown adults drowned together in a hot tub at the same time with no intoxicants in their systems and think it was an accident, even 47 can’t spin that shit).
Personally I always try not to leave a trace. I always stuff bodies in closets and pick up any dropped items.
… except for the blood spatters
All you people talking about never leaving evidence yet you all love fiber wire… nothing like leaving a big red welt clear across the throat to make sure everyone knows the target was murdered…
4 Likes
I don’t use the fiber wire much. It’s mainly accidents and poisons for me. Unless I figure out another interesting method.
But, it leaves no evidence of who, and until somebody checks the closet, the body won’t be found until 47’s in Tahiti drinking martinis.
1 Like
I go with the approach that SA doesn’t mean they will never know it was a hit. Just they won’t know until after 47 is gone and he’s left nothing that will make them catch him later. Tasteless + Traceless sounds nice but when 2 or more high profiles suddenly die for no reason within a few min of each other… it’s fishy.
2 Likes
Or an establishment with poor OSHA compliance.
1 Like
I just love killing targets together that are usually far apart, like killing all 3 targets in the jacuzzi in Haven:
2 Likes
I agree! And I love fiberwiring a motherfucker as much as the next person. … And yet, I’m of the opinion that IOI should introduce a “No Traces” bonus, like in MGSV (but much more refined / granular).
So, things that are blatant “traces” of foul play (e.g., red welt across the neck, broken neck, gunshot wound to the head, etc.), even if said traces do not lead back to 47, will void the “No Traces” bonus (you can still get Silent Assassin).
With Silent Assassin, you can be traceless, but still leave traces that just so happen not to lead back to you. Players should be rewarded for not even leaving such traces.
This is real shit, as many of you are aware; people dying all around us in “accidents” – with no indications whatsoever of foul play – that were in fact outright assassinations. That’s how the best get shit done in the real world. That degree of finesse should be distinguished and particularly rewarded in some capacity apart from Silent Assassin.
This bonus, if implemented realistically, would piss off a lot of players, though, because it would naturally be quite restrictive. Most notably, cheesemongers and speedrunners would shit bricks if this were implemented (they’d adapt, though).
The fiber wire’s not really different from any other kill method though, as long as nobody sees you nobody can trace the assassination back to 47 :x
I have a question. This might open a can of worms.
What is 47’s Canon playstyle? I tend to use the SASO method. Make it look like an accident. Does he canonically use disguises?
In the cutscene compilation it shows 47 dressed as a sushi chef or shooting the guy through the glass at the strip club. I can’t help but feel it’s not correct for some reason
But it’s also quieter, quicker and cleaner than any other kill method, other than poisoning in an otherwise empty room. It’s faster and quieter than a subdue neck break or knockout neck break, cleaner than knives or guns (ignoring that blood puddles don’t raise alarms in gameplay), and the fact that it can be brought through any frisks means special measures aren’t needed to circumvent security. While it had only one utility, implementing that utility in a brief moment of no observation has unmatched stealth kill results, outside of accidents or outsourcing.
Every game has featured disguises as a core mechanic of the gameplay. I don’t know about other media but 47 was born and raised in games. Those are the prime source material for who 47 is. 47 wears disguises when it suits his mission (pun sort of intended).
Suit Only is just an artificial difficulty that players force on themselves. It has nothing to do with 47’s character, despite IOI’s inclusion of the one or two challenges that require it. Those are based on difficulty, not on characterization.
4 Likes
He’s canonically a traceless assassin, generally put. So long as the approaches conform to “Silent Assassin”, they are left mostly open-ended. That’s my understanding of his overall “canon playstyle”.
Suit Only is canon. 47’s sniping ops are Suit Only. The Legacy trailer conveys that several past on-ground hits of his were (or reasonably could’ve been) Suit Only.
Is Suit Only how 47 always conducts field operations? No. But it’s not just an enforcement of artificial difficulty.
You just hate suits and ties is all. 47 loves 'em.
There are suits in 47’s wardrobe that don’t have ties (or are even “suits”). It’s more than just my personal dislike of that particular style of outfit.
Yes, if 47 is doing a sniper mission, he probably has no need for a disguise since he’s too far away for anyone to see him, but that is not the core gameplay of the game.
I didn’t say that 47 MUST wear a disguise, but he is not below doing so if the situation calls for it. If it’s easier and stealthier to put on a waiter’s outfit to get close to a target, he will do so. If it makes more sense to keep wearing his original suit, that’s what he will do.
47 is an opportunistic killer and will use his environment, other outfits, and anything else to get the job done. There are players who insist on never removing the suit and that simply isn’t 47’s characterization. Does he like to wear them? Sure. Does he do so to the elimination of all other options? No.
3 Likes
From Mendoza, between Diana and Vidal :
- Who came up with the accident MO ?
- It began with a jet ejection seat, but that’s a story for another time.
(video by @peloso)
And the jet ejection seat demands a disguise.
During the guided training, Diana is surprised that 47 takes the clothes of a man he just subdued, quote “you took his clothes, that’s a first”.
The fun fact is that there is a set of the same clothes in a bag a few meters away. Which I think indicates what the ICA thought was going to be the normal way.
I was always of the impression that using disguise is standard for the ICA (which was confirmed by Berlin), but what takes 47 apart from the rest is that he is willing (and capable) to take disguise from subdued people.
4 Likes
It is established, however, that 47 likes to challenge himself, and logic dictates that that includes eschewing using disguises whenever the opportunity permits itself. 47 himself attempts SASO to better himself whenever he can.
That being said, schatenjager is correct about disguises being a core gameplay mechanic. Each game has one thing that is its “meat.” Grand Theft Auto has jumping into any vehicle within reach; Dead Rising has picking up any item and hitting a zombie with it; Assassins’ Creed has parkour; and Hitman has putting on any new set of clothes that can be found to blend in. Sometimes, 47 would try to challenge himself, logic would dictate, to see how well he could imitate a person who belongs somewhere that he would not. So it goes both ways with both styles, but playing a Hitman game without changing into at least one disguise is like playing GTA and not getting into even one car.
SASO absolutism is a part of 47’s characterization precisely because it’s viable.
SASO absolutists are just taking an approach that is viably canon. One who does so isn’t merely artificially challenging themselves. They are taking one of many possible canonical routes to the Silent Assassin kills that 47 could’ve taken.
Otherwise, one must decide which out of the many possible Silent Assassin kills in 47’s career are the canon kills. But, of course, that’s a fool’s errand that goes against the soul of the franchise, as they are all viably canon. Even SASO every single mission in a given installment (particularly in WoA).
Bear in mind, I’m operating under the impression that the consensus on “canon kills” is “If it’s viable and adheres to Silent Assassin, then it’s canon”.