• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

So the Regeneration limit jumps from 12 to 507...? SJA SPOILERS

Does no one else agree that the Doctor being immortal would undermine the show?

Depends on how you define "immortal." It would certainly undermine the show if there was no longer a possibility of the Doctor being fatally injured before he could regenerate in the course of an adventure.

But I don't think that it undermines the show if the Doctor were to be otherwise immortal. Really, the show has already made him de facto immortal simply by virtue of the fact that they don't really address the idea of a regeneration limit and by virtue of having already made him so much older than all of his human companions. If they were to slip in a "the destruction of the Time Lords lifted the artificial limit on regenerations, rendering the Doctor immortal barring injury" infodump, it wouldn't realistically change any of the show's thematic content. It's already fundamentally a show preoccupied with the idea of how an immortal man copes with living in a universe of comparative mayflies.

How can there be an artificial limit imposed by the Time Lords in that way?

I don't know or care, because that's completely missing the point.

The point is that the show is already effectively about an immortal character, because the idea that the Doctor has a limit to his regenerations has never played a role in the program since it was revised, and that, as such, it would not weaken the show if they were to make the decision to contradict or remove the "13 regenerations" limit.

Saying that the limit was artificially induced by the Time Lords is just one potential justification for the decision to go beyond the Thirteenth Doctor. There could be others that they could use to justify the decision to maintain consistency. Or they could choose to ignore the inconsistency with TOS entirely. Whatever; it's not important. What's important is, it wouldn't weaken the show because the idea that the Doctor is mortal is already absent.

In fact, that line's just the kind of outright nonsense RTD would write. It cheapens regeneration, it cheapens the character, and it cheapens the mythos of the show.

You're getting caught up in irrelevant plot details instead of addressing the question of thematic content. Again, the specific plot device used to justify moving beyond the Thirteenth Doctor is irrelevant to the question of whether or not it weakens the program. Plot exists to serve theme and characters, not the other way around.

We've known about this limit for a long time now, and it's been a central part of the show.

No, it really hasn't. It was peripheral, at best, on TOS, and it's been completely absent from the revival.

Extend it in a clever way if you can find it, but I think making him immortal would be wrong all round.

Fair enough. But I think that's a very subjective evaluation; the most reasonable argument I think you can make is that the revived series has already been diminished from TOS by the Doctor's mortality being absent as a theme since "Rose" aired. But I don't think you can argue that contradicting the limit would weaken the series as it currently stands, because of the very absence of the idea of a regeneration limit since the revival began.

I got the impression he was just throwing Moffat something to use or not use. I prefer the unlimited regenerations due to no time lords.
Even though it makes no sense,

I for one really don't care if it makes "no sense," because I don't care if they contradict an episode or two that aired before USENET was invented.

and over the possibilities of a cohesive and interesting story on the matter?

There are possibilities for cohesive and interesting stories on the opposite matter, too. There are possibilities for cohesive and interesting stories on almost any given subject. At the end of the day, this argument is completely subjective. The only question is which potentially cohesive and interesting story you subjectively prefer.

"They only said 13 once or twice."

How many times do they need to say it before it becomes real?

Um, never, because it's all equally fictional. ;)

And RTD makes a valid point when he says that some "facts" stick and some don't. The Third Doctor claimed to be thousands of years old, but no one buys that anymore. Even the oldest estimates only put the Doctor at around 1,400.

Yeah the one thing that bothered me about the Master's resurrection in "The End of Time" and his "kewl" powers is that it was never really explained why they had to go through that elaborate ritual. All that was stated was that his DNA was contained or whatever in his ring and they needed a human to complete the ritual. I think it was a little complicated and convuleted process. I understand that there was no body for the Master to regenerate from and yes if he does return in the Moffat era it will be interesting to see how it happens.

The Master's resurrection scene in "The End of Time, Part One," was literally the first and only time in the RTD era that I sat there and shouted at the screen, "WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT?!"

But, hey, it's RTD, right? So, what everyone has done before is irrelevant. Right?

Yes.

(Of course, RTD is a hell of a lot more reverent of TOS than I would have been in his place. I'd've been tempted to declare all of TOS out of continuity with the current Who and to never feature any crossovers with TOS characters at all.)

Certainly it's trivial! My point was, just because RTD tried to change it on a whim doesn't mean it matters. There's a lifetime of the Thirteen limit in the show Doctor Who, and a single, joking line of RTD's in a spin-off kid's show. So, it's irrelevant what he said... :techman:

Yep!

Everything that comes before now is irrelevant in comparison to the needs of the story being told now. If Moffat produces a story that requires the Doctor to have a 13-regeneration limit, then RTD's line in Death of the Doctor is irrelevant. If RTD had needed to write a story about how the Doctor has no regeneration limits, then all of those stories from TOS would have become irrelevant.

After all, it's just as irrelevant that Jack disappeared into the TARDIS in the Hub in "End of Days" but had to run for it out in the open in "Utopia." It's just as irrelevant that in "Voyage of the Damned," the Titanic was a threat to the whole planet yet in "Turn Left" it only destroyed southeast England. It's just as irrelevant that Martha would not be working at UNIT Base in New York at 4:00 AM Eastern Time on a Saturday just when the Earth happens to be transmatted to the Medusa Cascade at 8:00 AM Greenwich Time. It's just as irrelevant that....

Etc.

Besides, RTD made it pretty clear he doesn't think we should take the "507 regenerations" line too seriously.

There’s a fascinating academic study to be made out of how some facts stick and some don’t – how Jon Pertwee’s Doctor could say he was thousands of years old, and no-one listens to that, and yet someone once says he’s only got thirteen lives, and it becomes lore. It’s really interesting, I think. That’s why I’m quite serious that that 507 thing won’t stick, because the 13 is too deeply ingrained in the public consciousness. But how? How did that get there? It’s fascinating, it’s really weird. Anyway, that’ll be my book in my retirement!

Assuming RTD is the one who said that, I don't understand what he's talking about. Is he saying that because we don't bitch loudly that he changed the Doctor from being thousands of years old to "900" that we don't "listen" to that? What? HE'S the one that changed the age rule in the first place!

No, that would be the writers who had the Fourth Doctor and Romana running around saying that the Doctor was only around 700 years old during the Tom Baker era.

What RTD said is completely valid: "Facts" get put onscreen, and both later writers and fandom accept some facts as binding while ignoring others in favor of contradictory "facts" given later on. Which "facts" are accepted and which "facts" are ignored is often quite arbitrary and subjective.

And that was forty-years-ago, and there was no internet. So, how would he or anyone else know who bitched about what, when that happened?

Umm, the Internet is not the source of all fandom nitpicking. It existed as far back as the 1960s when people would write compendiums to their favorite TV shows and nitpick minor continuity glitches.

And why should the fact that a few fans like us are weird enough to ramble about the show and look up "facts" from the show on the Internet bind the producers? Their goal should be good storytelling, not pleasing nitpicky uber-fans like us.

RTD's just pulling it all from his ass...

This is the guy that basically said he just makes things up off the cuff

"I live in the moment!"

http://www.sfx.co.uk/

Discussing re-watching a repeat of “The Sound Of Drums”, he ponders the fact that you suddenly learn about things like the Archangel network, the Valiant, and the TARDIS becoming a Paradox Machine out of nowhere, with no advance seeding or foreshadowing in the script. It’s a fascinating passage, worth quoting at length: “I can see how annoying that looks. I can see how maddening it must be, for some people. Especially if you’re imposing really classical script structures and templates on that episode, even unconsciously. I must look like a vandal, a kid or an amateur… The simple fact is, all those things were planned. All of them were my choice. They’re not lazy, clumsy or desperate. They’re chosen. I can see more traditional ways of telling those stories, but I’m not interested. I think the stuff that you gain from writing in this way – the shock, the whirlwind, the freedom, the exhilaration – is worth the world. I’ve got this sort of tumbling, freewheeling style that somersaults along, with everything happening now - not later, not before, but now, now, now. I’ve made a Doctor Who that exists in the present tense. It’s happening now, right in front of your eyes! If you don’t like it, if you don’t join in with it then… blimey, these episodes must be nonsensical

Um, no, what he's saying there is that he deliberately writes so as to create the illusion of there having been no pre-planning, so as to create the impression that everything is happening suddenly and unexpectedly. He's not saying he's making stuff up off the cuff, he's saying that he's writing to create the impression that it's coming off the cuff.

^
One of the more irritating quotes from the man. "I'm a revolutionary; it's your own problem if you mistake it for incompetence".

It is.

The reason traditional and classical script structures developed is because they work. Just chucking any old rubbish in is fundamentally unsatisfying,

For you. For others, it works just fine. Certainly the fact that Doctor Who's audience consistently grew during RTD's tenure, even as it won numerous writing awards, indicates that many others did find RTD's structural decisions satisfying.

Welcome to subjective taste.
 
And RTD makes a valid point when he says that some "facts" stick and some don't. The Third Doctor claimed to be thousands of years old, but no one buys that anymore. Even the oldest estimates only put the Doctor at around 1,400.

Indeed, sometimes "facts" in TV shows get left behind. Especially for a show that has been on the air as long as Doctor Who, I can definitely understand that certain things will end up being contradicted. That's fine, and it doesn't bother me.

The 13 lives thing is bizarre in its own right. Why would there be a limit at all? I could see resurrections being a part of the Time Lords life cycle, but then I would assume that different Time Lords would have a different amount of resurrections possible. Some Time Lords have awesome genes and keep themselves healthy and are able to regenerate more times than the fat and lazy Time Lords who eat fried food all day. I dunno, 13 regenerations for every Time Lord seems silly.

However, since this does seem to be something that fans care about, it shouldn't just be waved over. The issue should be addressed. The 13th Doctor should behave as if he knows this is his last chance. It would certainly make for an interesting variation of the character. Perhaps he will be extra cautious so as to keep himself safe. Perhaps he will be rebellious and live like nothing matters anymore. Who knows?

If and when they do decide to give him more regenerations, though, they should be vague about them. Don't attach a number to them, and don't make him immortal. Simply make it clear that one day he will die and he will not be able to bring himself back.
 
I was quite excited when I first heard about this, because it enables the Valeyard and Merlin Doctors to happily exist in the Doctor's distant future, but I am wondering now if Eleven was just kidding. If we ever do get to the Thirteenth Doctor, I think I'd like him to carry on afterwards.
 
For a fun little story meant to bring a bit of a smile to classic fans, and give a show intended for 8 years olds a nice little ratings boost, it sure has generated an awful lot of fan rage.

Jeez, its like a political forum in here.


*Edited for typos*
 
Last edited:
For a fun little story mean to bring a smil eto classic fans, a give a show intended for 8 years olds a nice little ratings boost, it sure has generated an awful lot of fan rage.

Jeez, its like a political forum in here.

Yeah, is it just me or has this place got a bit spikier of late?
 
For a fun little story mean to bring a smil eto classic fans, a give a show intended for 8 years olds a nice little ratings boost, it sure has generated an awful lot of fan rage.

Jeez, its like a political forum in here.

Yeah, is it just me or has this place got a bit spikier of late?


I was thinking about this over breakfast - why do people take what is a bit of fluff so seriously?
 
As for your idea, good for you but, as I think Lonemagpie once said, having an idea is the easy part, writing the story is the hard part; but if you want to be a writer go for it, the BBC Writers' room does accept scripts (though not for Who, but just like anyone else you'll have to serve your apprenticship if you're good enough before they'd let you anywhere near it).
Oh yeah, I'm under no illusion that I've near fuck all chance of getting my idea in there. I'm actually tragically plugging away on writing a two-parter in my spare time for Smith's Doctor that I like to think ties into the 2012 end of the world stuff in a clever way, but I'm quite aware there's next to zero chance of it going anywhere, however good it is.

Yeah, I'm not saying it just to intentionally rain on your parade, but you're right, there's really no chance of it getting made. The fact is that if you look at the Who writers, irrespective of their relative merits good or bad as writers, the truth is that all of them are established writers (someone might chime in and correct me now!). The BBC do accept spec scripts, but like I say not for anything like Who, you'd have to submit a new drama idea. Unfortunately the days when specific shows (TNG for example) accepted spec scripts are, I think, over.

This isn't to say you have no hope of ever, ever writing for Who, but at the very least you're going to have to serve an apprenticship first. Again irrespective of their talents, it isn't like RTD or Moffat walked straight into their jobs-both wrote for years before getting any real success.

I'd never discourage anyone from writing, I just think people need to be aware that it isn't easy to get a foothold in the business (how many times was Harry Potter turned down?)

Treat your script as a training tool; who knows maybe one day you'll get to use it in some way shape or form (again someone might correct me but I think The Long Game was an idea RTD originally submitted to the New Adventures novels in the 80s!)
 
BAHAHAHA! Perfect solution to the regeneration "problem."

I love RTD.

Yep. That pretty much settles it. :techman:

Of course, the producers will probably want to gin up some additional explanation when they get to thirteen and extend the Doctor's existence beyond it - which they will, without doubt - because why give up a perfectly good opportunity for the most dramatic season-ending story ever just because of a line in a spin-off? :lol:
 
In regards to all this, I've read something quite interesting on the site Rassilon, Omega, and that Other Guy. In the "Future Gallifrey" section of the timeline (AKA the Time War era), it's mentioned that according to some sources (Which could be the numerous unofficial charity anthologies, or the Bernice Summerfield novels, or the writings of Lawrence Miles), during the War, Time Lords gained the ability to regenerate over sixty times. So someone had already bypassed the "13 lives" rule long before Death of the Doctor was written. I can't say it would bother me too much if something like this did come to pass.
 
I know this is hard for young fans to understand but fandom did actually exist before the internet. :guffaw: People wrote news letters and fan magazines.

Man, I'm 37. I remember fandom back in The Day, because I was there too. And I'm telling you, there was no main, primal publication other than Doctor Who Monthly that could be compared to the massive web of fandom online now. There were a billion three-issue lasting fanzines and some students in California and England that used the original "Net" to discuss and complain about episodes. And since the point was that RTD claims there was no controversy between Pertwee and Baker's age gaffe, my reply is that he has no fucking idea. If he was even reading any type of fanzine or fandom publication in the day, he could have seen any number various positive responses to negative responses. He doesn't know whether people were upset about it or thought it annoying. All he knows is (if even real) what he personally saw, interpreted, and chose to accept as a fan. Much like the people saying, "Uhhh...900?"

^
One of the more irritating quotes from the man. "I'm a revolutionary; it's your own problem if you mistake it for incompetence". The reason traditional and classical script structures developed is because they work. Just chucking any old rubbish in is fundamentally unsatisfying, and I think it's a vain attempt to pretend he's operating on a whole 'nother level rather than being an incapable hack.

100% agreement. You're terrifying me. :lol:
 
Welcome to subjective taste.

You may wish you had never typed that... ;) :lol:


And to Starkers and Cutter, I apologize if I have brought in a negative attitude. When you debate and rant on the net, you have to rely on your words alone to carry across your message, mood, nuance, etc. A lot gets left out. So, many times if I seem like I'm getting hostile (even with Sci or Bones), I'm really not. A lot of what I say can be taken with a self-effacing tone, as well as a sly wink. Sure, sometimes I may have a L-O-T to say. Sometimes I may want to just hit CAPSLOCK AND START TYPING my rants. But, I'm never actually angry, upset, or in any way "deathly serious". We're just talking about a television show I've watched for thirty-two years, and so I always have an "opinion". ;) But, I sincerely want everyone to remember it's all in fun, and no ill will meant. :techman:
 
In regards to all this, I've read something quite interesting on the site Rassilon, Omega, and that Other Guy. In the "Future Gallifrey" section of the timeline (AKA the Time War era), it's mentioned that according to some sources (Which could be the numerous unofficial charity anthologies, or the Bernice Summerfield novels, or the writings of Lawrence Miles), during the War, Time Lords gained the ability to regenerate over sixty times. So someone had already bypassed the "13 lives" rule long before Death of the Doctor was written. I can't say it would bother me too much if something like this did come to pass.


That makes me want to see a scene from the TimeWar where timelords are zapped by daleks, regenerate then run around in confusion only to be zapped again

The Partisan: This is only the furthest edge of the Time War. But at its heart, millions die every second, lost in bloodlust and insanity, with time itself resurrecting them, to find new ways of dying over and over again. A travesty of life. Isn't it better to end it at last?

That line from TEOT part 2 got me thinking of that
 
For a fun little story mean to bring a smil eto classic fans, a give a show intended for 8 years olds a nice little ratings boost, it sure has generated an awful lot of fan rage.

Jeez, its like a political forum in here.

Yeah, is it just me or has this place got a bit spikier of late?


I was thinking about this over breakfast - why do people take what is a bit of fluff so seriously?

Why do you think about it over breakfast? There's your answer... ;)
 
I know this is hard for young fans to understand but fandom did actually exist before the internet. :guffaw: People wrote news letters and fan magazines.

Man, I'm 37. I remember fandom back in The Day, because I was there too. And I'm telling you, there was no main, primal publication other than Doctor Who Monthly that could be compared to the massive web of fandom online now. There were a billion three-issue lasting fanzines and some students in California and England that used the original "Net" to discuss and complain about episodes. And since the point was that RTD claims there was no controversy between Pertwee and Baker's age gaffe, my reply is that he has no fucking idea. If he was even reading any type of fanzine or fandom publication in the day, he could have seen any number various positive responses to negative responses. He doesn't know whether people were upset about it or thought it annoying. All he knows is (if even real) what he personally saw, interpreted, and chose to accept as a fan. Much like the people saying, "Uhhh...900?"

^
One of the more irritating quotes from the man. "I'm a revolutionary; it's your own problem if you mistake it for incompetence". The reason traditional and classical script structures developed is because they work. Just chucking any old rubbish in is fundamentally unsatisfying, and I think it's a vain attempt to pretend he's operating on a whole 'nother level rather than being an incapable hack.

100% agreement. You're terrifying me. :lol:

Uh he doesn't say anything about there being no controversy - just why do some things stick and others not.
 
507, a lame number just picked from the sky.

I like the idea that all timeloards have a set of regenerations of about 12 and they can get a new set of regenerations later. I always felt a greater mystery behind the doctor might be that this was not his first set of regenerations meaning he's been around a lot longer and involved in even more history of the timelords.

I think the Doc was just pulling his leg with this number.
 
Pertwee said he was thousands of years old and then a few years later the 4th Doctor was only 750

I've got it... At the time, the 3rd Doctor subscribed to the theory that he was the reincarnation of 'the mysterious other guy' who used to hang around with Rasillon and Omega back in the day. And so, he began counting his age from that starting point.

Sometime after that he either learned that this was not true, decided it was unlikely, or still believed it and just decided he didn't feel that old and went back to counting his age from his 'birth' as the 1st Doctor.
 
So only 508 Doctors? I guess that River can't be a future Doctor, then, as he'd be well into the 600s or more by the sixth millennium.;)

Of course, maybe he visits planet Zog in the interim...:)
 
Last edited:
The Doctor could have said anything to Clyde and it would have made as much sense.

Clyde: How many times can you change?

Doctor: Cheeseburger.

Clyde: ...what?

Doctor: Hippopotamus.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top