And anyone can be angry, that isn't specific to race. But assigning particular attributes to certain types of characters consistently is what creates a trope. You're literally googling tropes on the tv tropes website and then referencing broad literature. It's disingenuous, especially when you're using different tropes to suit your argument, as you just did but substituting the "hot blooded" trope when you couldn't find the definition of hot head. It's because there's no distinction worthy of discussion (like you tried to argue there was).
1. As it pertain to Black Panther, what writer are you referring to? He's killed humans from the 90s up until the Coates run in the late 10s. That's 20 years of his most popular runs where he's had no problem killing humans, and this period of time also coincided with his rise in popularity. Obviously him killing humans has had no impact on his popularity.
2. It's not one instance, you've been given multiple instances of Blade having no problem killing humans. Blade has been around since the 70s. While he could use more appearances, there's been over hundreds of comics to demonstrate his core attributes even if they aren't expanded upon. The idea that he doesn't kill humans has never been referenced.
3. You know what's more reflective of a books content than "tone"? The literal premise provided by the author. Moreover if your argument is about "tone" then the Savage Avengers still would be better than the main Avengers as only one of those books is explicitly about dealing with magical threats. The Avengers hasn't been a "non-lethal" team in years. We're a few years removed from an Avengers book in which they prevented incursions by killing global populations of people.