Howling:10th Doctor Technicality? (Spoilers)

The doctor has 12 regeneration cycles, correct? The 10th doctor TECHNICALLY used one of the series 4 finale episodes. Does that mean David Tennant is TECHNICALLY both the 10th doctor AND the 11th doctor?

Just because he didn't change his face, doesn't mean he didn't use a regeneration. The doctor number increases every regeneration so are we not at 11 doctors now?

Solore 04:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The limit of 12 regenerations (ie 13 lives) is a psychological one rather than a physical (I can't remember the novel, it's probably one the Virgin New Adventures), but it states that 13 is the maximum 'personalities' that can be contained within one Time Lord. Also until it's actually stated on screen how many regenerations he's got left anything other than that is total speculation. --Tangerineduel 13:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I think he's still the 10th - he said he used the regeneration to heal himself, but didn't want to change. But it probably won't matter as they are bound to find a way to go past the 12th regeneration anyway Jack's the man - 13:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've heard an interesting, though somewhat speculative, theory about this. In The Five Doctors, the First Doctor asks the Fifth Doctor what "regeneration" he is. Davison's Doctor answers, "Fourth", to which Hurdnall's Doctor says, "Goodness me! So there are five of me now!" Using this logic, after The Parting of the Ways, Tennant would have been the ninth regeneration, but the Tenth Doctor. After Journey's End, he would be both the tenth regeneration and the tenth Doctor. Course, there's no way to know how, or if, this will ever be dealt with on screen, but this little theory does have the virtue of at least being rooted in some kind of onscreen fact.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍ 02:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Since the regeneration wasn't complete and only reached the part of healing him before it was transfered therefore by logic he is the ninth regeneration and the tenth doctor until the show changes actors otherwise they would be taking years of the life of the show for the cliffhanger which didn't amount to much Dark Lord Xander 06:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, that's a logic, as well. But the fact is, it doesn't really matter until the BBC Wales series makes some sort of positive reference to the total number of regenerations, which they haven't, and won't unless there's some really good story reason to do so. Again, by the time we get to the 13th Doctor, the last mention of the number of a Doctor's "number" (the 1996 film) will be a very distant memory. Remember, there's not one scrap of dialogue which definitively calls the Ninth Doctor or Tenth Doctor those names. The closest is a very colloquial reference to the Tenth Doctor having regenerated "half a dozen" times since last meeting Sarah. I'm still not convinced that McGann necessarily regenerated into Eccleston, and nothing televised yet even suggests he had to (not even the Journal of Impossible Things). All we really have is RTD and Julie Gardner's behind-the-scenes belief.


 * The simple answer to the original question in this thread is that it is not correct that there are 12 regeneration cycles available to the Doctor until and unless the BBC Wales, post-Time War soft-reboot speaks in-universe on the matter.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍ 06:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Time Lords are limited to twelve regenerations (giving thirteen incarnations total). With all due deference to the previous comments, that is stated quite clearly on several occassions on screen. (I sincerely doubt that the 'new series' would divorce itself at this point so dramatically from the 'original series' as to contradict that, as they've tried very hard to maintain continuity.) The real question being asked above is: did the events in Stolen Earth/Journey's End count as an actual regeneration? My inference is that it did not, as the Doctor did not allow it to go "all the way". That seems to have been the implication of the writer as well. However, it's not clearly stated, so they could probably play it either way in the future if they wanted to do so. Regardless, there will always be a way for a creative writing staff to get around this limitation should they need to. That's part of the beauty of science fiction :) preceding comment was added by r 161.11.120.174 at 21:17, July 22, 2008

I agree with the above that the Time Lord does indeed have 12 regenerations, therefore USUALLY 13 incarnations. Of course the debate is did the Doctor use up a regenration? Of course he did. It would seem that regeneration is a biological process, in this case one that results in the expellsion of a huge amount of energy (for 15 hours, at least). The Doctor used a small amount of this to heal himself, yes, but he then transfered the rest of the energy into the hand. Therefore he used up one lot of regenerative 'energy', which by extention means he used up a regeration. He didnt actually regerate, but he did use it up. You could say the MetaCrisis Doctor is the 11th Doctor as the energy from that regeration ended up with him, but seeing as its unlkely we'll see him again that argument is mute. Therefore Tennant is the 10th Doctor, but on his 11th 'life' (as it is called in the movie). The logical summary is that the Doctor will only have 12 incarnations instead of the usual 13, but has used up '12 regenerative cycles' as well, with 2 being used by one incarnation...greedy. As for what the production team will do when he hits that 13th 'death'...who knows? But it's neither here nor there and irrelevant to this dicussion, we're delving into plot specualtion now. Taccer 07

PJCNET: It will be very interesting when the BBC decide they want another doctor when the 12 regenerations are used up. What story will they produce to get around this problem as I can't see Doctor Who ending forever when this happens after what will probably be only a few more years. Since the modern Doctor Who comeback with Christopher Eccleston, they're getting through doctors quicker than ever and as they're now on the 12th Doctor at the time of writing which many people are already calling this the doctor's last regeneration, although this shouldn't in my opinion be in the case as to be the 12th doctor he's only had 11 regenerations so far with 1 regeneration remining. Okay, I suppose you could count being born as the 1st regeneration, but it's not really a regeneration in the true defination of the word as he's being generated for the 1st time (not regenerated from another body that existed beforehand). The 4th doctor, Tom Baker was doctor from 1974 to 1981 and starred in 172 episodes (180, counting his regenerations scenes and "Shada"), but recent doctors have only starred for a fraction of this time despite being popular. I'd like to see a popular doctor continue to play the role for many years like Tom Baker. Anyway, the doctor can't possess someone else's body to get an extra regeneration like The Master did as this would be evil, but perhaps he'll somehow get granted another 12 regenerations to protect the universe, although it's also difficult as the rest of the timelords are supposed to be wiped out. 15/5/10


 * Moffat has, at least twice, said that "a good friend" with "deal with [the 13 incarnations] problem" this year. What exactly this means, we can't possibly know until after we see it happen.


 * One fan speculation, that the "good friend" was his buddy Simon Nye, and they'd put a loophole around the 13 thing into Amy's Choice, seems to be pretty clearly ruled out now. The next biggie is that RTD will solve it in Matt Smith's SJA appearance this year.


 * Personally, I think Moffat was mostly just teasing, and by "deal with that problem" he didn't mean "RTD will solve it by giving the Doctor more regenerations" so much as "River Song will bring it up and make a 'spoilers' joke about it" or something like that. But again, it's all just speculation at this point.


 * I do think it's pretty clear that Moffat thinks of Matt Smith as the 11th Doctor, not the 12th, off-screen, but that's not worth anything until we writes it in-universe. --Falcotron 11:21, May 18, 2010 (UTC)