>>43333943Well it seems to boil down to knowing someone well enough that you can predict what they're going to do because that's what they've always done in these situations in the past.
You can count on Batman not killing people, because Batman has a hard rule against killing people. But a Batman Gambit would be counting on Superman not killing people, because while he's killed some people in the past, he still believes it to be wrong and hasn't ever really forgiven himself for it, so he's even more inclined to not kill people than Bats.
The trick is that it basically excludes outside factors. Up until a few years ago, you could count on a Green Lantern not killing you, because a GL ring can't be used kill people, and it locks you out and turns you in to the Guardians for judgment if you try. But then the Sinestro Corps War, the War of Light and Blackest Night happened, and now GLs can kill. There was an issue or two when bad guys didn't know that GLs could kill now so they never expected them to respond to lethal force with lethal force.
>>43334130No, you've got it backwards.
Xanatos Gambit is where you plan things out so that no matter what happens, you gain something from it. Roulette is when you plan this huge elaborate scheme, but if you happen to call the coin toss wrong in Step 5, the whole thing falls apart.
>>43334136Because the people who made TVTropes grew up when Gargoyles was airing, not when Fu Manchu was popular.
