Originally Posted by Smolder
I've got to respect your persistence. But it is more than adequately explained by the comic itself. The key line is "You're too young to remember, but [Drow sign language] was quite the fad in its day." Drow sign language is a real D&D thing, not something Rich made up. It really was a fad back in the day (I confess to being old enough to remember), much like drow themselves.
So, after having just said
that it's not the individual things themselves that feel wrong, but the overall coincidence of all of them right then when they were most needed, and yet again you pick and explain one of those to me?
Even after having already said this,
Originally Posted by Mantine
There will always be "explanations" behind a DE, checkov's gun or whatever other plot tool, the point here is not that what happened is unbelievable or impossible, but that it's so overly convenient that it reaches the point of breaking my suspension of disbelief.
Which pretty clearly states how anything
can be explained some way or the other, but that doesn't automatically make it believable and plausible?
Tl;dr What do I care if it's "adequately explained by the comic itself"?
You could give me Xykon blasted to bits by the Enterprise and spend one month's worth of strips to explain how Kirk got there... but that doesn't mean I would buy it.