If you’ve ever wondered how “Doctor Who” could continue when the Doctor runs out of regenerations after the twelfth time, you’re not alone.
Fans have been curious since the series returned and as we get closer to the 13th and final Doctor.
Producer Steven Moffat has long said that the series would deal with the question and now it appears they will–on an upcoming episode of “The Sarah Jane Adventures.”
According to the UK’s “Guardian,” an upcoming episode called “The Death of the Doctor” will address is as follows:
While the Doctor and Clyde Langer, played by Daniel Anthony, are in the process of outwitting spooky vulture undertakers the Shansheeth, Clyde asks how many times he can regenerate. The Doctor indicates that there is no limit. The action continues.
So there you have. The series will get around the question by ignoring the continuity.
Of course, it’s not like “Doctor Who” has been built on solid continuity to start with. When it first began, the production teams never imagined the stories would be seen more than once on original broadcast. So, continuity was never a strong point for the show during it’s run.
Works for me, but I think an awesome season ender to fix that little problem would be cool too.
Don't see the big deal. The Master has to be on regeneration 25 or 30 by now!
Anthony Ainley's regeneration was already beyond 13...
I think it's ridiculous. I don't mind if they say he has infinite regenerations. I DO mind that they're dealing with it on a spin-off show that I don't watch.
Yes, the Ainley Master was the 14th...but the show at least tried to explain how he extended his life.
Not a big deal in my book. From what I've read, the original regen rule of 12 was created in the '70s when they had no idea how long this show would run. It makes sense as long as the quality stays good.
Besides, the Doctor has lied multiple times. Who's to say that the original rule of 12 wasn't a fib to begin with?
There are a number of things to consider here -
1. Ostensibly the Doctor is the only timelord, thus making him the sum total of the timelord hierarchy.
2. The Timelord council had the ability to grant further lives to timelords who'd passed their prime or even died (established for the Master in the new series)
If we take just these two bits of information into account, it shows how the infinite regenerations can come into play. The Doctor, being the head of the governing timelord body by default (let's not forget at some point he wasn't just a member, he was also the president [old series]), then we have to assume that he can grant himself any number of regenerations as the ruling body deems necessary.
It's all there. Messy, but there. And I did it with continuity. Yea, me.
In the Audio play "Davros" (Doctor Who 48 - Big Finish), Davros specifically states that Time Lords are immortal.
This doesn't mean that he's immortal though. If he was, say, vaporized, he obviously couldn't regenerate after that, so he would indeed be dead. So eventually, he will die. It'll just take a lot longer than people expected.
That limitation was always a legal limitation, and not a limitation in the technology.
I think "The Invasion of Time" established that each Time Lord gets one regeneration cycle (12 regenerations) but that was in a conversation about the laws of Gallifrey. The Master was planning to break the law because he was out of regenerations.
A couple of seasons (series) later, Time Lords in the "The Five Doctors" offered the Master another 'life-cycle' if he would help the Doctor. That implies 12 more regenerations.
If you want to talk about continuity issues, we saw the Master as an eight years old child a couple of years ago, but there are no children on Gallifrey, and haven't been for millenia. Time Lords are not born, but woven from the "genetic loom."
Correction: It was in "The Deadly Assassin" where they first established there are 12 regenerations in a cycle.
We actually don't know what vaporizing him might do - it COULD trigger a self-defense regeneration in some way, however, we do know that the choice not to regenerate is an option (again, new series), so if the Doctor just got tired of it all, he could choose to die.
This could still leave the path open for him to come back, again demonstrated by the recent Master episodes, where complex rituals brought him back.
There doesn't seem to be any permanence to a Timelord's death... except all of those trapped on Gallifrey in that trap the Doctor came up with.
I don't mind this... Dr. Who forever... I'm good with that. It's like Smallville, the "no fly zone" mandate has been lifted.
Audio dramas and novels aren't canon. Only what we see on TV.
We got the loom concept from Lungbarrow--a great novel and originally proposed as a TV story but not canon.
As for the Davros claim, it could appear to him that the Time Lords are immortal.
Anyway, the series has established there are 12 regenerations. The Master stole a new body from Tremas in Keeper of Traken by using the energy from the Keeper and the Traken Union. It's later implied the Time Lords gave him a new Time Lord body and regenerations in Five Doctors when he helps the Doctor in the Death Zone.
Yes, I am a very, very persnickity Dr Who fan...why do you ask?
What I don't understand is why do with a throw away line now what you could do later with well written drama and tension. I mean God forbid the audience believe that the Doctor may actually die.
I swear in the 11th episode or series 3, Utopia, the Doctor and Jack are having a conversation and the Doctor says, "The last act of the Time Lords was life." Granted I could have misinterpreted War as Lords in reference to Rose destroying the Daleks and reviving Jack.
Aside from that, I've always been under the impression that the regeneration limit was something imposed by the Time Lord society. It makes sense to me. No Time Lord society, no regeneration limit.
When I was at the "Canon of Doctor Who" panel run by the BritTrack at Dragon*Con, it was stated pretty clearly that the Audio and Novels, those approved directly by the BBC BTW, ARE considered canon, and that the TV show contradicts itself more often than the EU (Expanded Universe) does, so...
Well I'm not persnickety, and I got most of my info from Wikipedia, but I haven't seen any evidence which would lead me to believe they need to make a big deal out of it.
There's enough evidence in existing canon to support my argument that the limit of twelve regenerations is more of a legal issue then one of technology. It also sounds like the Doctor doesn't consider it an issue right now, and that's probably because there is no one around to enforce the law.
However, I don't believe for a minute that's the end of it. We have a couple more Doctors to go through, and even if there's no technological barrier to endless regenerations, there's a reason for a law like that, and I agree it might be interesting to find out what it is.
I'm also persnickety, and would like to point out that there is no such thing as canon in Doctor Who.
Michael said it first.
I have been wondering about this topic for a long time. I do remember that the Master seemed to always be on his last regeneration and yet would always come back time and again. So I prefer the idea that Timelords have an infinite number of regenerations.
Arkle, Arkle, Arkle....
If you start to include the novels and the audios, then you get into the question of which are accepted and which aren't. To the BBCs eyes, the NAs and MAs from the 90s are not, but their novels are. And then with the Big Finish, some of those aired on BBC radio and some didn't....so the canon question is not one that is easily answered. The BBC hasn't helped at all by that stance....not one bit.
Hence why a lot of fans say only if it happens on screen does it count.
and yes, the series does contradict itself a lot....hell, it consistently contradicts what will happen if the same character meets him or herself from different points within their time stream. Really, the continuity at times depended on what the story needed dramatically and not necessarily what came before. (And don't get fans started on the TARDIS's state of temporal grace or defense systems...LOL)
I still don't think making the Doctor immortal is the best idea. Maybe Moffat can sell it in such a way that I will like it. But for now, I'm not a fan.
Even if the Powers That Be on the series aren't going to explain this change on screen, it's gratifying to see so many dedicated fans finding ways to justify it within existing canon.
And I think there's a very fine line between "immortal" and "capable of infinite regenerations". Jack Harkness is the former, The Doctor is (apparently) the latter. I doubt a Time Lord could recover from being blown up.as thoroughly as Jack was in 'Children of Earth'.
Robin: I had the same thought about Jack Harkness. (That was torture to watch. In the sense of empathizing with the character, I mean, not as in "bad TV." _Children of Earth_ was very *good* TV.)
Anyway, the _Sarah Jane_ episode in question hasn't been broadcast yet. Given that the Doctor is speaking to a young man during a tense moment, it might be that he's stretching the truth in an effort to be comforting.
Even if he isn't, I don't think this "throwaway line" indicates that the production team are necessarily casually disposing with the issue. More like they're floating a balloon to see which way the wind takes it.
Who knows? Maybe they're reading this forum right now, seeing which resolution ideas find the most traction with fans.