Talk:Rassilon Imprimatur

Time Travel without the Rassilon Imprimatur?
Since this special characteristic is supposed to be available for/in Time Lords only, at last I understand it like that, how is it possible that other being - like humans for example - seem to be able to time-travel without any ill-effects? Of course, as far as I know, we haven't seen any other species than the Time Lords travelling through time and space regularly and obviously with ease, as if it was the most normal thing in the world. Usually it's an extraordinary experience for other beings. I mean, none of the human companions of the Doctor might have been with him long enough to show any ill-effects. Please, can somebody tell me where I might find more information about it? After all it would be interesting what time-travel means when one doesn't have the Rassilon Imprimatur.

Treelight 18:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure that they were saying that a Time Lord needs the Rassilon Imprimatur for him to prime the Tardis. I suspect this is based around the psychic-link-thingy that Time Lords have with their Tardis. The Rassilon Imprimatur would just be used to connect to a Tardis. After it's primed, I think anyone can use the Tardis. I suspect time machines made by another species could be used without a Rassilon Imprimatur (I doubt they would design it like that).


 * I'm not entirely sure though. It's been a while since I've seen The Two Doctors, and technobabble has never been one of my strong suits. --

Behind the scenes
The only mention of the Rassilon Imprimatur on-screen was in The Two Doctors. Due to the nature of the scene it is unclear whether the Doctor is honestly describing an actual technical requirement of the Kartz-Reimer module, or lying to ensure Stike forcing him to "prime" the module (and granting him the opportunity to covertly sabotage it.)

Spinoff mentions of the Rassilon Imprimatur have generally assumed the Doctor's statement to have been entirely true, and treated the concept thusly.


 * I removed the above behind the scenes section as it seemed somewhat speculative. I think without further sources that confirm that this was the intention of the statement it shouldn't be on the article. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:19, January 21, 2012 (UTC)