My play style, finally explained

First of all, for what reason, especially following the parameters, would you need to be carrying 5 screwdrivers and 4 wrenches? One of each should be enough for anything you’re about to do. Secondly, it is possible, and officers of intelligence agencies around the world can confirm this, to hide something upward of around 80 or so weapons on yourself at any given time, with variations in that number based one what clothes are being worn. 47, master that he is, has perfected this and knows how to hide numerous items on his body. Hiding his gun and fiber wire is no trouble, especially since his fiber wire isn’t even found in a frisk, and he could just carry the explosive rubber ducky in his pocket since it’s disguised as an innocuous item.

How do you get the sawed off shotgun onto the map in the first place? You bring it in a briefcase or have ICA drop it off in one of theirs. So you would leave it in the briefcase when traveling. Frisk ahead? Avoid that, find another path, or leave the briefcase behind. Need to climb? Put the shotgun on your back and climb, then be stealthy and stay out of sight until you’ve used it for what you want to use it for. Picking up a large rifle found on the map? Well, you shouldn’t be doing that anyway if you’re following the parameters, and shouldn’t be packing the sawed off shotgun either, for that matter, but still, use stealth to stay out of sight, or take a gloved disguise of someone who can open-carry, such as those found in Whittleton Creek or Isle of Sgail. Plus, most maps have a briefcase somewhere that can be picked up and used, so use that to transport such a weapon. Crowbar? See the answer to the previous question.

The people on the map will assume such a strange person is mentally challenged and shrug before moving on, or is perhaps is super lost, or is maybe making some kind of sociopolitical point in protest of something. And if those explanations don’t do it for you, then see step 1 of the parameters, which essentially states that if you’re going to play ridiculously, then you’re not actually following the HPP to begin with and so they don’t apply to how you’re playing right then.

Because following the rules as stated would avoid such nonsense to begin with, and I have enough faith in the average Hitman player to understand that a lack of mentioning such scenarios specifically does not necessarily permit their usage.

Not at all what I stated; not even close.

Never try to outwit my logic with a “gotcha” question. I’m better at them than most.

1 Like

Not literally those items. :roll_eyes:
Any items.

And putting things back seems overkill, not realistic. Why would the “FBI” connect a missing crowbar from across the map have anything to do with a guy that has a speaker fall on top of him? Nothing. Don’t forget there’s far more crime going on in the rest of the city, not just the hitman map.

#HeisenbergLogic :joy::joy:

Then use a more relevant example and I’ll address that, too.

“Let’s see… this winch holding up that church bell looks like it’s got some scratches and scuffs on it. That might just be from past repairs, or it could have been there when it was installed… or maybe somebody tampered with this and made that bell fall. No, I’m not saying it was deliberate, I’m just saying this looks a little unusual and I want to look into it. Start canvassing, asking some of the people who work here, see if any tools have gone missing or have been moved without notice, just in case. Hell, see if anything’s gone missing at all. If so, maybe we’re looking at more than we thought.”

What else you got?

Yup, and ready for anything. You really don’t understand how much thought has gone into this, how carefully I’ve crafted this play style and the story it tells.

1 Like

Well first, you make the mistake of assumption. I never said I used the crowbar on the chandelier. I just said I took a crowbar. And if you’re in Mumbai, you think a chandelier fallen on a guy is gonna be questioned at the tailors office? I don’t think so. They aren’t gonna ask the entire city what has gone missing. If so, I’m still waiting for the police to ask me questions about JFK’s assassination.

So on that, why would I put the crowbar back from all the way across the map where the death of a person has occurred? Doesn’t make sense.

I could understand in the near vicinity, but from across the map? Doesn’t make sense to bring it back. In fact, you’re putting yourself in more of a situation to get caught at bringing it back than not since you’ve already got away clean.

Sorry but I see so many loop holes. Mostly unrealistic ones. But if that’s how you enjoy to play, all good. I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just questioning the broken logic behind some decisions. That’s all. :grin:

Enjoy!! I’m out.

Hmm, let’s see. Man fries to a crisp after stepping in a puddle with an electrical plug lying in it. The plug is damaged, so we can’t really tell what happened. It was likely something just faulty with the wiring and it was purely an accident, there’d have to be some other kind of evidence or something suspicious happening around that time to justify pursuing this further on the idea that someone deliberately did this. What’s that? One of the maintenance workers filed a report of some tools that went missing around the time the accident occurred? A screwdriver was among them? Hmmm, a screwdriver is all one would need to have tampered with the plug’s wiring. Alright, we’re going to look further into this and see if it really was an accident, or if someone did some funny business here.

As for why across the map, well, I generally wouldn’t take from clear across the map, I’d wait until I was a little closer to my target before taking an item I’d need to make an accident, unless I intend to use an exit that’s on that far side of the map, and the tool I need is located there, so I pick it up at the beginning, and then place it back as I’m leaving since it’s on the way.

Two so-called loopholes, that I already thought about and resolved years ago, taken care of. What else you got?

1 Like

The thing is, they’re your rules Heisenberg: they’re intended to fit your standards of realism, roleplaying and fun. I think it’s pretty cool that you’ve gone so far as to make your own ruleset and make the game more difficult in a way that makes you enjoy it more. If you thought there were loopholes, you would have closed them, otherwise it wouldn’t be HPP. If you don’t consider something a loophole, then why would you do anything about it? It’s a personal playstyle, and it’s yours to customise. I think the idea of having one is amazing, and honestly I can’t fault it: only you can. I’m not in your head, I don’t know how you think or what you like. It’s completely your thing.


really just feels like its drawing the game out and making it boring, but everyone plays the game how they want and you just let them do that, i personally would hate playing like this though


There’s a word I’m not going to use that begins with A… but yeah… it screams that.

Feel free to say it, I’m curious.

Well, as stated under step 1, the point of this is that you’re playing as 47, you’re playing out his story and your performance is part of his official record. If you’re not playing like that, none of the rest of it will apply to you.


How do you feel about Trzebiat’s “No Foul Play” playstyle?

1 Like

I drink when I play.

1 Like

I stopped role playing due to Diana cutting in and breaking immersion in so many missions.

Diana’s communication is part of the immersion.


When you’ve heard it enough times and it overlaps with other in-game dialogue, making both audio sources incomprehensible, it’d be nice to have an option to turn off handler dialogue.

1 Like

I just time my interaction with other NPCs with dialogue to not happen when I know Diana is gonna speak. A good example: Vetrova at Haven. I get in range enough for Diana to say what she will about her, and then I get close enough to trigger her dislodge. Easy-peezy.

1 Like

I’ve been a huge proponent of a “mute Diana” option ever since the 2016 game. How is she even seeing all of this anyways, if we’re going to talk about immersion? You could argue 47 has a tiny camera on him (a theory I dislike but that’s not important), and that’s how she sees targets he eliminates up close. Okay, how does she know when a target drinks a poisoned drink from across the map? Is ICA recon just ridiculously thorough to the point where they planted cameras all over the map like it’s Manhunt or something? Then what about the many missions where you don’t have ICA assistance?

That said, I just want to mute her because she’s kind of loud and annoying. Though her interjections are usually brief enough that it’s not a huge deal, I just would prefer an option to turn her in-mission dialogue on or off.


She has access to spy satellites all over the world. She’s actually mentioned that in regards to Colorado, and those satellites allow her to zoom in with infrared, so she’s watching the whole thing. She also accesses security cameras and such.

Fair enough, I still find her dialogue to be kind of intrusive though.

Where was this stated?

Colorado. She states that they’ve “borrowed” an NSA spy satellite. I can’t remember if not was for Freedom Fighters or The Vector, but that’s where it was. And that’s the implication; that after Absolution, Diana began following along with 47’s missions more closely, actively guiding him where possible and confirming the deaths of targets. I’m assuming that their high profile in the ICA is why this was allowed and it likely doesn’t happen with most agents and handlers.