Talk:The Master (Terror of the Autons)

Naming
Should This be changed to "The Master (Roger Delgado)" ? Quark16 16:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That would just make it even more out-of-universe. -<Azes13 16:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Seconded. --Tangerineduel 16:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I think its a better idea .. "The UNIT years" sounds very silly to me ... Quark16 18:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It may be a vague name, but The Master (UNIT years) is an in-universe article, every other character is written in-universe, no characters are identified by the actor playing them as, for instance they are not playing them in ever instance of the Master (UNIT years), their likeness is featured in those stories but the actor is not. --Tangerineduel 03:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The Master (UNIT years) is an inaccurate name. About half of the twentieth century, and the begginning of the twenty first century could be considered "UNIT years", in universe, as UNIT still existed. This name could describe any incarnation of the master that came to Earth while UNIT existed. Also, this Master did not only exist in the "UNIT years." He has been in episodes, such as Frontier in Space, and Colony in Space, that take place in the future, in a time when UNIT may not exist.Icecreamdif 21:51, September 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * See Tangerinduel's explanination above and the title UNIT years refers to the earth based episodes, which out weighs the space bounded stories (Two space stories as opposed to the six earth bound stories) Bigshowbower 07:01, September 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * If the title is supposed to be from an in-universe perspective, then this title is wrong. In-universe, the Master did not only exist when he encountered the Doctor. He was a timelord, who travelled through time, and occasionally visited the "Unit years." This title claims that this Master only existed in the "UNIT years," which is wrong.Icecreamdif 02:43, September 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * This is true. Going by his appearance he first meets the Doctor in The Dark Path or there abouts. The UNIT years title is a thematic title and represents his motivations and characteristics during a set period of time as we don't have another thematic hook to wrap up the article under. --Tangerineduel 04:02, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

UNIT years doesn't really work as a name for him. He has been in a few episodes that UNIT wasn't in (Frontier in Space, Colony in Space, The Sea Devils). UNIT has actually been in all of John Simm's episodes (discounting his cameo in Utopia), so technically UNIT years would apply more to John Simm's Master than Roger Delgado's Master. Also, the Master obviously didn't spend all of his time stalking the Doctor. Apart from when the Doctor stole his dematerialization circuit, the Master was presumably wandering throughout space and time, commiting evil deeds elsewhere in the universe. Since this wiki is in an in-universe perspective, the fact that we only see him when he encounters the Doctor does not matter. Gowron8472 21:42, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

12th Master
I think it's pretty clear from in-universe sources that this is the 12th incarnation of the Master: In The Eight Doctors, this Master regenerates into the Tersurus Master. In The Keeper of Traken, we find out that the Tersurus Master is his 13th incarnation. Hence the previous incarnation (UNIT Years) must be his 12th. I propose that the intro to this page be edited to reflect this fact. Thoughts? Any reasons for/against? Aliyoda 18:12, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

It's in the Legacy of the Daleks that the Delgado Master is turned into the Terserus Master, he doesn't regenerate, just gets scarred. In the Eight Doctors he just has a generic Earth Arc appearance. He is the 13th incarnation of the Master. Hope that helps, check the forum post on it for more info. --Revan\Talk 18:15, September 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Legacy of the Daleks is what I meant. Don't know why I said The Eight Doctors. From what I recall, I was pretty sure that he regenerated, but I may be wrong. If that's the case then I repeat my initial proposal but instead change "12th" to "13th".
 * And where can I find the forum?
 * Aliyoda 18:18, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * The forum post was the whole reason that this page was merged with the Terserus Master page, yet for some reason I can't find it. You can find the forum on the drop-down at the top of the Wikia Activity page and the page should be found in "Panopticon". --Revan\Talk 18:24, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

I'd stay clear of trying to pin down the incarnations of the Master. As The Five Doctors showed, Time Lords can be "given a whole new cycle" and without the absolute clarity of say, the Doctor, we shouldn't try and force things.-- 18:25, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

I've searched the forums, and I can't find one on the Master which mentions this. And do we not count the statement made by the Master himself in the Keeper of Traken, "As you know, I'm nearing the end of my 12th regeneration" as definitive? Or do you mean that this "12th" regeneration could be the 12th in "a whole new cycle"? Aliyoda 18:30, September 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, well I suppose on the other foot, there's no proof that he got a new cycle and it seems unlikely. Yes, I think we could say he's the thirteenth, though I would get an exact reference to keep everyone happy. By this I mean, get the DVD and make a note of the exact second in which he says that line, then add it here or as a reference. This is obviously a disputed fact, meaning it is true, but people need a nudge to believe it. Can you do that?-- 18:34, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've found it. 19:26 into Part 4, the Master says, "I am now nearing the end of my twelfth regeneration." (ie 13th incarnation) Aliyoda 18:46, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I added the reference. This is likely to spark controversy, so watch this space!-- 18:50, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

Title
Now that this has been merged with [The Master (Tersurus)]], the name The Master (UNIT years) makes even less sense. He has now appeared in stories where not only was UNIT not even remotely involved, but it had been many years in real life since UNIT had made an appearance. Why don't we just move this page to Thirteenth Master, since the whole reason that he turned into the Tersurus Master was that he used up all of his regenerations.Icecreamdif 18:49, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

The Master (Original)?
How about this for a title. After all, this was the original incarnation of the Master before the Tresmas incarnation. Also, it was the first incarnatuion to use the Master as a name, the prvious one using his birth name Koschei.Retsinif talk to me 19:05, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Delgado the 13th?
At the beginning of the page someone has put that Rodger Delgado's Master is in his 13th incarnation. I don't believe that that's correct at all because to my knowledge, after he was mangled by the Dalek artifact he used up the rest of his regenerations trying to restore himself, and ended up as the rotting, zombified one, which was his last life and the reason is focus was on trying to restore himself, since being in such bad shape was killing him. Near-sighted Jedi talk to me 21:19, December 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I think you're mischaracterising Legacy of the Daleks a wee bit. The word regeneration appears exactly once in the book, and that appearance does not support your view that he "used up the rest of his regenerations trying to restore himself".  Instead, the book says he was already in his last regeneration when he was mutilated by Susan into the grotesque figure of Deadly Assasin. In Keeper of Traken, he does specifically say that he was nearing the end of his 12th regeneration.  The Doctor confirms this means the last incarnation.  So this means that the guy in Keeper of Traken is the Delgado Master, deformed.  It also means that the Delgado Master is the "Thirteenth Master".  Traken gives us solid canonical grounds to rename this article, Thirteenth Master.  Therefore, we also have cause to change The Master (Tremas) into Fourteenth Master.  But I still think it's better to put it all on one page, the Master. 06:20: Sat 21 Apr 2012

Well, i find it quite odd aswell. If anything the Roger Delgado incarnation is on his twelth incarnation, not his thirteenth, it even says so in Legacy of the Daleks-

"Of course... He already knew that the Master had hidden on Tersurus when his final regeneration had been used up. Some devastating force had ravaged his body and left him a crippled wreck." (The Doctor muses on page 235)

Sorry it's late to the discussion but if the novels are a reference point, then one would have to factor this in. 86.29.236.107talk to me 18:12, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

The 13th?
In what episode is it confirmed that the roger delagado master is the same as the deformed version of the master? They are two separate incarnations as i want a line of dialogue that shows the delagado master saying he is the 13th. Until then it is just speculation.

"You keep using that word... I wonder what you think it means."

No, it's not speculation. In EDA: Legacy of the Daleks, it is revealed that they are on in the same. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 22:06, July 12, 2012 (UTC)

I mentioned above that in Legacy of The Daleks the Doctor clearly knows that the Delgado Master had one regeneration left before it was used up on Tersurus, i even included the quote. It spells out that Delgado is on his 12th life and not his 13th, given the novels are a reference point. I haven't misquoted, i promise ;-) 86.25.29.82talk to me 18:21, July 15, 2012 (UTC)
 * But you have totally mischaracterized. There's no doubt that Susan causes and witnesses the "transformation" of Delgado into Beevers/Pratt.  There's no regeneration that happens there at all.  Legacy is the very basis for calling the two versions the same.  You need to reread the passages as a whole — not concentrate on one very out of context sentence.  21:43: Sun 15 Jul 2012

I certainly have read it all, quite a few times, and in all honestly there's nothing in the Susan V Master passages which contradicts the idea that he has One Regeneration left, as the Doctor comments in the quote above. In fact all we have is...

"There was no respite for him now, no way to regenerate from such a death."

...but this is narrative, it's not personal to the Master and not his thoughts, as it is soon followed by...

"It was over. The Transmuter was destroyed, the Master dead."

So you can see that, if anything, this is what Susan believes. She believes he is now dead and assumes no-one could regenerate from such a death, but he survived. No suggestion at all that the Master was already on his 13th life. In fact, in the whole expanded media range of Doctor Who there is only one comment that gives us an idea of where the Delgado incarnation fell, and i've quoted that in the thread above this one.

So it really should be looked into more, perhaps others could read through Legacy of the Daleks themselves? It's just a suggestion, I don't want to cause any undue hassle or upset.86.9.234.213talk to me 16:56, July 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * I have personally read through the book myself. Very good, I suppose. Personally, I think the text supports both of your theories, and I don't know who to agree with... I'm leaning a bit more towards 86 surprisingly. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 19:36, July 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * The way i see it, is that the Doctor knew what happened to the Master since his Baker Incarnation. So out of everyone there is in their universe he'd be the closest thing to an authority on the Master, and what i quoted in regards to his final regeneration being used up on Tersurus is all that i can see as a true reference point to where the Delgado incarnation actually falls. I guess it doesn't really matter in the end, the world won't stop spinning if some believe he was the 12th or the 13th (or 8th according to FASA, but we won't go there) but i felt it would be good to, at least, raise the point.86.9.236.185talk to me 15:04, July 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * My personal understanding of the canon is that whats said on TV or in the official Doctor Who Magazine overrides anything written anywhere else, I think that also includes the 96 movie. But I will admit my understanding might be wrong. GrimmShadows ☎  01:30, September 15, 2012 (UTC)