Howling:Valeyard

The Howling → Valeyard

There be spoilers about un-released stories here.
Run back to the forums if you're scared.

Not here to discuss about meta-crisis Tenth Doctor...but is it even possible to resolve the Valeyard issue when he isn't formed yet but Gallifrey is already timelocked? --222.166.181.44 20:03, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

• Yeah. If the universe was truly reset in the Big Bang, this may include Gallifrey and the time lock etc. It would also fit in with River's comment that everything changes soon in the Doctor's future when he finds out who she is. The Thirteenth Doctor 20:21, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

I was looking for more intelligent answers like breaking into the timelock is what caused Valeyard to come into existence or something like that....and I don't see how River could be tied to this...can you stop spamming threads with irrelevant stuff --203.168.176.42 21:03, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

• How the hell are any of my posts spam? Firstly, you aren't 222, so I don't know where this "I" comes into it. Secondly, for someone who was "wanting sources" for all these answers, I give something that could possibly support it, and you say you can't understand it? What would your answer be then, oh knowledgeable one? The Thirteenth Doctor 21:15, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

The series 5 finale probably doesn't have anything to do with the valeyard. The time-lock only covers the time war, and Trial of a Timelord took place before the timewar, and wasn't even on Gallifrey.(I haven't seen the end yet, so I may be mistaken.) There was an episode where the doctor implied that he could go back to pre timewar Gallifrey(I think it was Father's Day). The time-lock isn't the reason he can't go home, it has to do with what he is always saying about being part of events. The valeyard clearly doesn't care about the laws of time, since he is breaking the first law, so he wouldn't have a problem going to a timelord space station before the time war.Icecreamdif 00:34, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, Thirteeth...where the hell does River fit in with Valeyard's existence? We're talking about Valeyard...you should leave your non-sensical theories that have no relation to the topic to your own thread. --203.168.176.42 05:25, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Look. I didn't say River had anything to do with the Valeyard directly. 222 asked how the Valeyard could get into Gallifrey if it was timelocked. I gave the explanation that the Big Bang 2 reset the universe, bringing back the time lords. If it did this, it would herald a big change in the Doctor's life, just as River said "That's when everything changes."

And you should probably stop the spamming. I've contributed to the discussion, you haven't. All you have done is make negative comments. Stop being so immature. --The Thirteenth Doctor 12:27, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and while we're on the subject of "non-sensical theories" and "spamming" I'll ask you to have a look at this. --The Thirteenth Doctor 12:57, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

" breaking into the timelock is what caused Valeyard to come into existence" is definitely a contribution, and a much more reasonable one? We all know it's unlikely that Big Bang 2 took out the timelock and it's quite clear that you have taken River's quote out of context. It makes no sense either...because "that" wouldn't be when everything changes...everything would have already been changed at the wedding. The Doctor can sense the existence of other timelords...there's no reasonable justification to say that he'll suddenly realize the Timelords still exist and not know it by the time of the wedding. --222.166.181.48 12:58, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, are you two the same person? There is no context for River's quote as we don't know what she's talking about, so it can hardly be taken out of context. Moffat wouldn't have him know they exist at the wedding as it would ruin the next series wouldn't it, revealing the plan so early. And I'm sure that it's when he sees them he knows they are Time Lords, not he knows if they exist wherever they are. If the Doctor doesn't find out that they are alive until he meets them then it will be then that everything changes, when he is actually affected by their return. --The Thirteenth Doctor 13:12, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Then how is it a support if you think anything would fit in with that comment? The most we can make out of the comment is that the "everything" refers to their relationship because they were talking about them meeting...if you say we don't know what she's talking about so we should end every single speculation with "It would also fit in with River's comment that everything changes soon in the Doctor's future when he finds out who she is."...that is spam...--203.168.176.42 13:26, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

No, it is not spam and every speculation cannot end like that. I fail to see how "everything" refers to their relationship. Since when is a relationship considered "everything"? --The Thirteenth Doctor 13:39, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

"everything" as in everything between them? If you meant "everything" literally, then what does Timelords have to do with everything...the literal "everything" would have already changed when Big Bang 2 happened... --203.168.176.42 13:52, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

I mean everything literally. And the Time Lords returning would have to do with everything. The number of Time Lord rules the Doctor has broken, along with his destruction of Gallifrey and the Time Lords, twice, would most probably render him an enemy of them. Everything would change for him, he'd again be able to travel between all the parallel universes and the laws of time would again be governed by the Time Lords. And for the universe, yes, the everything would have changed when the big bang 2 happened, but for the Doctor, only when he meets them, will everything change for him. --The Thirteenth Doctor 13:58, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Now you're saying "everything changes" means "everything change for him" specifically, how is that literally everything...They were talking about their relationship and their meetings...Can you try to give some thoughts before typing even if you are incapable of thinking...You are not making it more reliable by quoting that line, you're just making yourself sound even more brainless than everyone originally thought...--203.168.176.42 15:33, August 1, 2010 (UTC)