Howling:The Thirteenth Doctor's Death

The Howling → The Thirteenth Doctor's Death

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

We know that the Doctor has travelled throughout most of the eras and has often come across events related to his past/future, now if the Thirteenth Doctor does die in an adventure, wouldn't he leave clues to prevent it that his past would come across? Does it suggests that if the Doctor has to die, then either the Thirteenth Doctor will die in a sudden death or the Thirteenth Doctor will be mentally/physically impaired when he dies or that the Thirteenth Doctor will die in the middle of nowhere where no one could find him? Is there any way for the writers to work around this limit to the Thirteenth Doctor's ultimate death if he does die? --222.166.181.174 15:42, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

The Doctor's death features in Alien Bodies, it's implied in The Five Doctors the Time Lords can give a whole new life cycle to another Time Lord. In one of the New Adventures it's stated the 13 regeneration limit is a psychological one rather than a physical limit. --Tangerineduel 15:58, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah...thanks Tangerineduel, I never knew that "the Thirteenth Doctor thing is just a psychological problem", but I guess this is more of a restriction for any ultimate death for the Doctor if he does die...it just makes no sense for him to have slow death or die in a resourceful situation unless he willingly does so. I mean there is always the possibility that the Thirteenth Doctor will be weary of his own life because of all the damages he directly/indirectly did to others and the people/civilizations that the Thirteenth Doctor will have disturbed, destroyed, and caused inconvenient to. But on the other hand, there seem to be these restrictions that the Doctor can't rationally die in any situations that will allow him to leave clues to his past. This is very problematic, as many of the threats we've seen throughout the series could be solved by these methods similar to the Big Bang...so they're just not threatening unless there is a way to work around this. --222.166.181.29 17:38, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

There is no reason to believe that the thirteenth doctor would be able to prevent his death. The tenth doctor clearly didn't want to die(even though he only regenerated), and he knew his death was coming, but he wasn't able to prevent it. Besides, even if the thirteenth doctor could prevent his death, he would still die eventually. The first doctor is proof that timelords do age if they go long enough without regenerating, so the doctor will die eventually. Also, the timelords can not give the doctor a new regenerative cycle, because they are dead. The Deadly Assassin and The TV Movie both make it very clear that the 12 regenerations limit is a physical limit, and not a psychological one.Icecreamdif 18:16, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

The honest answer? Whoever is running the show will ignore it. You want an in-universe explanation? Pre-Time-War, Time Lords made sure their soldiers would keep coming back by removing the limit/indefinitely bestowing regenerations/set up a system where all regenerations would be pooled (leaving the Doctor with thirteen multiplied by the Time Lord population), and the whole thing will be explained away as a quirk caused by the Time War, or a lie the Doctor told his companions, or whatever... Cannon881 18:37, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

It definetly wan't a lie that he told his companions. The entire plot of both the Deadly Assassin and the TV Movie was that the Master was out of regenerations, and needed to use the eye of harmony to get a new body and a new regenerative cycle. It would be stupid if they decided to write a way around the regeneration limit, because it would get to be a ridiculous number of doctors, and the Doctor would be more like Captain Jack if it turned out that he was immortal. Matt Smith, and his two successors should just stay on for a while(unlike Christopher Eccleston), and then the show should end when the thirteenth doctor is ready to leave.Icecreamdif 18:50, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

• There is always the Crystal Ball of Zog which RTD mentioned... hehe. But I don't think the BBC will end it after the 13th one. They might, if the ratings are so low, but I doubt it. Maybe they'll simply leave it a mystery, like the eighth Doctor's regeneration; having the thirteenth leave perfectly happy and fine, then the next episode simply introduce a new one, without regeneration. The Thirteenth Doctor 19:00, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

My main concern about the Thirteenth Doctor, whether he is just a big annoying recurring compulsive-obsessive psychological problem or physiological one, is that he is supposingly the last incarnation, and when it's about survival, the Thirteenth Doctor is bound to break rules as he has always shown, just like what he did in the Big Bang, because there's probably no punishment/consequence greater than death. Tenth maybe afraid to break rules and stuff, because he still had to live to suffer the consequences as tenth or eleventh, but unless something stops him, the Thirteenth Doctor will do anything and break any rule to keep himself alive if he wish to stay alive. The afraid of creating paradoxes and forbidden from crossing own timeline arguments that the writers use so often don't apply to him. The point is that has anyone figured out a way to reasonably explain such continuity gap something to exterminate this annoying Thirteenth Doctor problem that plagues the show, or is the Thirteenth Doctor destined to die in a sudden death or to die willingly? As long as this problem isn't solved, many of the threatening situations in the show just don't work out at all regardless of which incarnation it is...--222.166.181.20 19:03, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, Cannon881, was just editing when you responded...anyway, you can remove any problem by saying the writers will ignore it...but attempting to explain it in a the perspective of the characters would be a nice way to solve the continuity gap. The problem doesn't only lie in the Thirteenth Doctor...it also refers to any possible life-threatening situation the Doctor faces in a resourceful state...but I just kept refering to it because it's common knowledge/assumption/whatever that the Thirteenth Doctor will face the ultimate death. --222.166.181.20 19:03, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

There's always the option of the ultimate reboot... a literal, 100% new continuity. And does it say anywhere in relation to those two stories how many regenerations the Master used up? Besides, this is mere pedantry. If the ratings are enough, the Beeb will keep the show. End. Which particular marketing exec who used to watch Tom Baker is gonna say "Actually, boss, because of a throwaway line 25 years ago, our multi-million pound franchise is going to have to be scrapped."? Is remaining true to the story worth that much? If the BBC announced there would be no Doctors after 13, I would personally set up a campaign to make them reconsider their decision. A good story may be essential to good television, but I'll be damned if I let that story get in the way of me ever seeing that television show again. Cannon881 19:09, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

• I've recently made a forum about the properties of the chameleon arch, which is something that could actually be used here. The chameleon arch changes biology from Time Lord to Human and the consciousness is stored in the fob watch. Note that it's only ever the consciousness that is said to be kept there, never the physical details. When the watch opens and returns the conciousness to said Time Lord, the cells change back to Time Lord, but, where do the details come from? Perhaps the cells actually return to their default state; they are changed to Time Lord, but not given any properties, such as age or number of regenerations. This would mean that the tenth Doctor's regeneration would essentially be the second, first regeneration. --The Thirteenth Doctor 19:21, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

The regeneration limit was talked about in both of the episodes where the master had used up his regenerations. The chameleon arch theory could work if the writers wanted it to, but it would be weird for the 14th Doctor to say "technically I should be out of regenerations but 4 regeneraions ago somethiing happened and my limit is now 23." It would have made since if it had been mentioned in Human Nature or the Family of Blood. After 13 doctors the show should stop, even if the ratings are strong. It is always better to end a show when it has good ratings, and to leave the audience wanting more, than to keep the show going until the ratings go down.Icecreamdif 19:27, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

You guys are assuming the the doctor cannot possibly die before his thirteenth regeneration. This is not true. Remember what the 10th told wilf. he said that he might die permanently if he didnt have time to regenerate. And it actually happened in Turn Left when the doctor drowned. So even if the doctor has unlimited generations, this doesnt mean that he becomes immortal like captain jack. Now back to the original post, if you consider that the 13th should break the rules just to survive, this must also apply to almost all of his incarnations, because none of them is sure that he'll regenerate. The 10th knew he was going to die, but wasnt sure he'll regenerate, so he should've done the same thing right?77.42.181.163 19:28, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Possible, but how would this be explained? If I was the Doctor, it's not something I'd drop into conversation, especially as it is referencing two things that neither effect nor bother the (no doubt relieved) companion. Sorry, I'm sounding really negative today :P I personally just think it'll be one of those things the fandom will be left to sort out... Like the restoration of the Time Lords between The Gallifrey Chronicles and Rose Cannon881 19:33, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with Cannon, there'd be no reason for the Doctor to tell her, especially since she didn't even know about regeneration, or at least not that we know of. I actually hope that it is left a mystery off screen, like the eighth Doctor's. Just look at how much people want to know that, not knowing how he survived beyond thirteen would send them crazy. The Thirteenth Doctor 19:43, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

The difference is that the eighth doctor's regeneration is easy to explain. We don't know the exact circumstanes, but we know that something that happened to him 7 times before happened to him again. If they show the thirteenth regenerate with no explanation, it will be harder to explain, because they will be showing something that has been stated to be impossible on multiple occasions. The thirteenth Doctor won't break the rules to avoid regeneration. That is what the Master has done on multiple occasions, by possessing people and by somehow becominging a decaying body and a ghost snake thing. I can't really see the doctor doing any of those things just so he could live longer.Icecreamdif 19:57, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

• Oh no, the Doctor would never harm anyone else to survive, but I'm pretty sure he would break the rules, if he needed to, to stay alive. No matter what anyone says, he wouldn't want to die, survival instincts are too strong, especially when there's a way. I'd still like the 13th's regeneration to be off-screen. The Thirteenth Doctor 20:02, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, the responses are getting completely off topic, can't we bloody keep the discussions on this thread about the continuity problem with Thirteenth Doctor's ultimate death (and that includes any possible ultimate death before the Thirteenth in any resourceful situations), for whether the Thirteenth Doctor's limit is a psychological or physiological one, go to the other thread. --222.166.181.34 20:06, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

I can't see how they could do the thirteenth's offscreen if its a continuation of the series that is going on now(that started in 2005). It would be too random to just suddenly have another actor playing the Doctor in one episode. Recasting the Doctor in Rose worked, because the TV Movie aired almost 10 years before Rose aired, but unless the show takes another decade long break, they need to show a regeneration to recast the doctor. The thirteenth Doctor's death wouldn't cause any continuity problems. It would be easy to write a way where there is no way for the Doctor to escape death. The Doctor won't die before 12 regenerations, because the BBC won't end the show before they have to.Icecreamdif 20:10, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

The 13th regeneration is not the only time where the doctor faces the ultimate death. He could've died any time during his other incarnations (like in Turn Left). Every incarnation is in danger and could die permanently if he didnt have time to regenerate, so why will he break the rules only for the 13th incarnation? in The End of Time he thought he was dying permanently, why didnt he do it then?77.42.181.163 20:13, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

How could he break the rules to avoid death. He won't do what the master did, so what else could he have done to avoid death. The episode made it clear that he was dying, and there was nothing he could do to stop his regeneration. Even if he could break the rules, he new that he wasn't dying permanently because the regeneration process had already started, since his cuts healed. The only Doctor who wasn't sure if he would regenerate waas the fifth.Icecreamdif 20:16, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

• Why would it have to take a break? All we'd need is for the first episode of a series to start in the same manner that Rose did. Alternatively, this is my idea, the thirteenth Doctor meets the next one, then the show simply follows him.

222, we're not getting completely off topic, we're diversifying to discuss the pros and cons of the suggestions. --The Thirteenth Doctor 20:20, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

It would just seem kind of weird if one season ended with one actor playing the Doctor, and the next started with another playing the Doctor, with no explanation at all. Rose started the way it did, because the new series is almost a completely diffent show than the classic series, even though it continues from the classic series. Since it was like a new show, they were trying to ge tnew viewers, who would be confused if Mcgann played the Doctor in the first episode, and then regenerated shortly after into Eccleston. The new series won't just randomly recast the Doctor, with no explanation, when the show has been going on for several years.Icecreamdif 20:26, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

77, please read the beginning of this thread...We're just labelling it the Thirteenth Doctor because his death is ultimate and inescapable...the problem applies to all incarnation of Doctors...If they could leave clues to their past self in life threatening situations, they would. What is the way to work around this continuity issue that prevent many life-threatening issues from being life-threatening.

The Thirteenth Doctor, the thread explicitly states that this deals with the temporal paradox issue that the ultimate death raises, for the discussion of the psychological and physiological problems with the Thirteenth Doctor that Tangerineduel, Icecreamdif and many other users have raised, please feel free to diversify but do not take over the original intention of the thread when there is another thread devoted to it. I fail to see any pros and cons in the discussion either...--222.166.181.229 20:33, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

• 222, our discussions have nothing to do with "Is the Thirteenth Doctor's Limit a Psychological Problem or a Physiological One?" They are more appropriate here. The original post said "Is there any way for the writers to work around this limit to the Thirteenth Doctor's ultimate death if he does die?". We are now discussion how the writers could do it without showing it. We are completely on topic. --The Thirteenth Doctor 20:45, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

The Doctor could not go back in time to warn himself about his own death if he is dead. Even if he could, it would be against the laws of time.Icecreamdif 20:51, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Thirteenth, the original post said "Is there any way for the writers to work around this limit to the Thirteenth Doctor's ultimate death if he does die?" NOT '"Is there any way for the writers to work around the Thirteenth Doctor's ultimate death?" The '"limit" refers to the paradox stated right before the sentence, neither can not dying be considered "if he does die"...please read what you misquote. If you don't find the thread about The Thirteenth Doctor's -- psychological and physiological problems one appropriate, you can start your own thread that deals about killing off the Thirteenth Doctor and keeping the show running. Is it so hard to stay on topic? --222.166.181.71 21:00, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Icecreamdif for something that's finally on-topic...the discussion is he would break the laws of time if it involves his death, wouldn't he? What measures are there in the show to prevent it? --222.166.181.71 21:00, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry, what are you actually asking then? How the hell can there be a paradox? If the thirteenth Doctor dies... he dies... end of. There's no way the writers could bring him back. The Thirteenth Doctor 21:08, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

After the disastrous consequences of breaking the laws of time in the Waters of Mars it is unlikely that he would break them again. In Parting of the Ways, after the Doctor decided not to use the delta waves, the Dalek emperor said that the doctor would be exterminated, and the doctor said "maybe its time," accepting his fate. Earlier in the episode, Rose suggested that they go back in time to warn Earth about the dalek invasion, but the doctor refused because of the laws of time. Even if the doctor was willing and capable to break the laws of time, it still wouldn't be practical. In order to travel back in time to warn himself of his own death, he would have to either know that he was going to die before it happened, or he would have to travel back in time after he died, which would obviously be impossible.Icecreamdif 21:09, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Well, Thirteenth, since you've never read the initial posts or completely doesn't understand what the thread is about, please do not engage in off-topic discussions in a thread that you don't understand. This is rather annoying to other users who are actually discussing the problem. Feel free to fix your timeline model instead of leading off-topic discussions to a thread with a legitimate topic.

Icecreamdif, yeah, that's what we mean, but we are discussing the exceptions, given the conditions that:

1. The Doctor must die willingly, and

1. The Doctor must die suddenly or without resources

Many of the threats presented are not threats at all, the Doctor can simply leave clues in an era and expect past Doctors to come across it to prevent his death. He is willing to break rules in the Big Bang and he mentioned that there are no rules to survival when he was escorting the Master's remain. Any unwilling death can almost be certain to be ruled out given how clues can be left to the past like how River leave clues in the most random places and the Doctor would just come across it sooner or later. --222.166.181.250 21:25, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

In order to leave clues to his past self about his death, the Doctor would still have to know that he is going to die. Once he knows the details of how he is going to die it will be to late to leave clues to his past self, because he will be dead. When he said that there are no rules to survival, he was refferring to the Master who is a very different character to the Doctor. One of the most important aspects of the Master's character is that he fears death, which was brought up recently by the Doctor when he threatened to blow up the rcokets in Last of the Timelords. The Doctor may not want to die, but he wuoldn't go to the same extremes as the master to avoid death.Icecreamdif 21:32, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

I guess yeah, it turns out to be more of a theoretical problem than an actual continuity problem...but it's the issue that there is always a choice that the Doctor can always save himself, given that he can leave clue in the first sign of danger...the fact that when he does die, it would be that he himself chooses death and not forced to die...it takes away all the life-threatening or dangerous aspect of the show. I guess it was more for a theoretical solution to keep the thrill aspect of it...Given his action in the Big Bang and how much trouble he went through to avoid one single regeneration I believe his comment about survival probably applies to himself too... --222.166.181.2 22:05, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Well, in almost every episode there is a first sign of danger. The Doctor risks his life in every episode, and it wouldn't be practical to warn himself about the danger in every episode.Icecreamdif 04:11, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

I am sure there are any number of ways for the writers to get around the problem. For example - the Doctor pulls Gallifrey out of the Time War and rescues the Timelord race. As a result he is awarded a new set of regenerations (or maybe some other timelords somehow "donate" a few regenerations to him). Or the Doctor does another job for the White Guardian, and gets more lives as a reward. Or the Doctor finds the fabled underpants of Rassilon which allow extra regenerations... 187.112.22.92 20:45, August 7, 2010 (UTC)

i think the simplest way of going about it is that the doctor will believe that it is his final death and is completely suprised when he regenerates into a new form. 121.216.229.210 09:57, July 20, 2011 (UTC)

I think Moffat's just given himself an out - River gave all of her regenerations to the Doctor!

Did the Doctor actually get Melody's 10 remaining regenerations, or did she just need to use all of them to save him from her poison? If the Doctodid get her regenerations, then thatprobably solves the problem, as the show will probably not go on for another 12 regenerations. Even if the show does last that long, then Moffat did successfully make it somebody else's problem.Icecreamdif 22:10, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

Minor point: We don't know how many regenerations Melody had left. We know of two she's used. We don't yet know there were no others. She could have regenerated one or more times between being abducted as a baby and being found in 1969 Florida. --89.241.68.131 01:48, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess she did seem to know about how regeneration worked in New York, but I doubt that she had regenerated more than once...maybe twice before at that age. If she did actually transferher regenerations to the Doctor, that leaves more than enough left for the show to go on for a few more decades. Still, my interprtation of the dialogue was that River used up her regenerations to help the Doctor, but she didn't transfer them to him.Icecreamdif 01:53, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

Also, she says in Let's Kill Hitler that the last time she had done this was in New York when she was a toddler -- the regeneration seen in Day of the Moon. While she might have regenerated one or more times between being kidnapped at Demon's Run and that, there's no reason to assume it until proven. Boblipton 02:46, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

I agre, that it is most likely that she's only regenerated tweice, but as the anon said, we don't know that for a fact. Itt is probably best to assume that the regenerations that we've seen are the only ones, but for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't really matter.Icecreamdif 04:13, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

No, she must have regenerated another time around 1992. We see Mels in the 90s as a little girl, the same age as Amy and Rory, and she continues to grow at the same rate as them up to 2011. If she regenerated in Mels in 1969, unless she went into statis or traveled in time, she'd be 20 years too old for that. (Plus, she says that she _became_ a toddler last time she regenerated, not that she _was_ a toddler, which implies that she had some earlier regeneration where she _didn't_ become a toddler. Although, come to think of it, if she had said it the other way, that would be even better evidence, because the little girl in DotM was nowhere near a toddler.)

But anyway, as long as she didn't regenerate 11 times, as Icecreamdif says, it doesn't make a difference. She had some regenerations left, she used them all up healing the Doctor, that's all we need to know.

The big question is: Why didn't the Tersurus Master ever trick, manipulate, or just torture some other Time Lord into using their extra regenerations to heal him? Sure, it wouldn't have gotten him the big prize of another cycle, but it would have been a lot easier to hunt for that new cycle in a healthy body than as a decaying zombie thing (just as he later did with Tremas's body). --173.228.85.35 04:50, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

maybe river is special because she's the child of the tardis, so that gives her special abilities that normal timelords don't have. Imamadmad 06:42, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

"she must have regenerated another time around 1992": Mels herself said that the last time she regenerated she "ended up as a toddler in New York", which implies the regeneration we saw, in early 1970 (six months after the Moon landing), was that last time. Time travel is a far more likely explanation for her being about the same physical age as Amy in 1990s Ledworth. She was presumably planted in 1990s Ledworth for the specific purpose of encountering Amy's "imaginary friend" in due course -- but only after (a) she herself had helped to get her parents together as a couple and (b) the events of her parents' timestreams had progressed beyond her own birth. She met up with the Doctor (with the purpose of killing him) at pretty nearly the earliest point she could without creating a paradox by preventing her own birth. --89.241.71.249 18:02, August 30, 2011 (UTC)