Just thinking about the idea of partial regeneration, in particular, what was shown in Journeys end, where he healed himself and then siphoned off the remaining energy into the biometric converter (aka his spare hand) and thinking- why doesn't he always do this?

Surely if all it takes is a bit of DNA then a box of collected hair, fingernails, bottle of urine etc would be sufficent to keep around in the TARDIS, then, when disaster strikes, run back to the TARDIS, let the regeneration start to go through enough to heal the damage then just siphon of the remaining energy and hey presto, mortal wound healed with no need for a change. Yes it would still cost him a regeneration, but if he was really comfortable in his current skin to the point that he never wanted to change it (as he particularly was as the 10th doctor) then surely this would be the way to do it.

Also, while I'm the subject, ive always wondered about the partial regeneration of Jenny at the end of the doctors daughter. It's played as though she isn't quite enough timelord to regenerate, but then she heals without changing. I find it strange because it seems as though it's meant to make you think she doesn't has as much power as the doctor, so she can't change, but to me, I've always thought, surely that makes her more powerful than him, as he'd love to be able to be able to heal a fatal wound without having to change but can't (unless he has the aforementioned biometric converter) .

Anyway, any thoughts on either or both of these points?

I know people are more interested in subjects more related to the current series at the moment, but does no-one have any thoughts at all on the subject?

Jenny was only a few hours old. So the same rule may apply as when the newly regenerated 10th Doctor grew back his hand.

As for keeping spare parts lying around, the Doctor didn't know how that would play out. It appeared to be a spur of the moment thing during the regeneration. Plus it carries the risk of creating unstable meta-crisis beings.

Just think if that hadn't happened we'd still be on the cusp of a final regeneration.
I get the feeling that Moffat desperately wanted to be the one that created the reset of Regeneration 2.0.
Since the introduction of story arcs for DW post-2005 became a template, I began to wonder by the time 2007 came along, how they'd do it. Personal expectations are the bane of fandom that leads to many a let down, which is why I never do it anymore.
I had imagined that it would've made a fabulous story-arc that the Doctor was on an epic quest to find it over a whole series and not just within the final moments of an episode.
But not just to piece jigsaw pieces together from clues within the quest but to put a time-limit on the whole thing to add jeopardy, otherwise it would really be the end of him.
In other words, for something that fans have been avidly talking about since the late 1970s and such a major issue and gloriously pulpy in WHOlore you could cut a knife with it, it felt a bit by-the-by and well, rushed for my liking.

I like to imagine the Doctor doesn't care so much what sort of face he wears until the time comes. So keeping loose DNA around on the off-chance that he changes his mind would seem like a pointless exercise to him, since he's never known anyone to reject him post-regeneration.

I've seen a lot of people say this and based on not much more than Moffat's big personality (which people often label as ego) I'm not sure what they're going on. To me, it's more of an issue of the show being less in danger of cancellation if they've started over again with a regeneration cycle. I know that might sound odd, but there are probably some who would feel if the Doctor's on his last life, the show costs a lot to make, ratings are dropping (and the sky is falling!), then why not have him go out with a bang on his last life? For me, it made perfect sense to give him a new start in his 50th year - the only way it could've been more perfect is if it had happened in the special or if we'd actually had a proper stint from the War Doctor (or a Ninth Doctor guiding us through the 1990s).

Same reason he dosent break off some TARDIS coral and plant them everywhere maybe?g

Perhaps it's the small matter of him retconning in a completely heretofore unmentioned regeneration to reach the limit.

10th Doctor has vanity issues - quote 11th Doctor.

I mean like when he currently has a body he wants to keep time, like when he was the 10 doctor and he really didn't 'want to go'. He knew he could do the whole siphoning thing, because he already had done it at that point, so surely after Journeys end, or when it was first prophecised that he was going to die, he could have made sure that he kept some DNA around so that he would never have to change the body he had come to love so much.

And that's somehow evidence of an ego-trip conspiracy, whereas Russell engineering the usage-of-a-regeneration-without-changing-the-Doctor isn't?

Yes. Russell's idea, though ultimately quite stupid, was not in furtherance of him getting to be the person who "breaks" the regeneration limit. Moffat's, in my firmly held opinion, was.

Who the Hell does Moffat think he is running the show he's paid to run. Having ideas and then executing them. Is there no end to his ego?

I see your point, yes. A man doing his job, however badly, should be entirely immune to comment or criticism.

I didn't intend for this to be another Moffat bashing thread, there's already plenty of that sort of thing to go around on here.

Just to reinterate my main question of thread is that, if he knows of a way to heal a deadly wound without changing, why wouldn't he keep some DNA close around any time he had a body in which he was comfortable and really didn't want to change (like especially the 10th doctor)

I see someone said further up about the risk of possibly loads of meta crisis beings created as a result, but surely he could just keep the 'biometric converter' in question locked away in one of the TARDIS's many rooms after the event.

Actually, thinking on that point further, if he did it a few times, and had a fair few DNA samples filled with latent regeneration energy, then maybe one day ran out of traditional regenerations once more, I'm thinking if he touched them all at once, it may well be enough to give him one more full regeneration.

That's the point. They did the same thing, but you've come to different conclusions based on who was actually doing the job at the time, not based on any evidence of intent. You can't prove 'intent' from a game of pass-the-parcel.

Well, an opinion is just an opinion, no matter how firmly held, without some evidence to support it.

He should not be immune from criticism of his work, but to assume some kind of intent without personally knowing the guy is just wrong, in my firmly held opinion.

Here's my interpretation of his thought process regarding the 50th:

He needed to come up with something suitably "big" to mark the 50th Anniversary.

Multi-Doctor, check
Multi-time zones, check,
Big historical event? Fall and destruction of Gallifrey, check
Earth in danger? Zygon Invasion, check

All of the above we've kinda seen before. Something more is needed... Something the fans will talk about for years...

Total surprise: A New Doctor we've never heard of before, check!!

Nailed it!

Oh, and that means another special event when Matt moves on. Even better. We can get his replacement for a cameo in the story too and deal with the whole 12 regeneration limit as well.

My evidence is the ham fisted decision itself, to introduce a "new" Doctor that had never been referenced in any way, the explanation for this being weaker than a kitten.

So, despite the use of emotive but ultimately meaningless adjectives, all it really boils down to is that you didn't like the introduction of the War Doctor.

That's a subjective opinion and is fair enough.

No. I freely admit I didn't like him, he was badly written and acted, but my issue as it pertains to this discussion in particular is the concept itself and its timing. And I don't think I was even particularly unclear on that, you just wanted to dismiss my opinion in lazy fashion.

No, I just wanted to point out that accusations of intent based on nothing at all are unwarranted and wrong in principle.

It's not based on nothing at all. You can argue you don't like my reasoning, not that it doesn't exist.

Perhaps if at least you outlined your reasoning, instead of asserting that your opinion is reasoning?

Look. no problem in not liking the War Doctor. It's the going on to assume ego issues for SM that I find objectionable.

I wouldn't like unfounded personal attacks like that on me, and I assume neither would you. That's why I say it's wrong.

Do you know SM? Have you personal experience of him? Why do you attribute "ego" to his decision to add an unknown Doctor?

Just as you have no problem with me not liking the war doctor (thanks, by the way), I have no problem with you disagreeing with me on this subject. There's not a hope in hell I'm going to move you from your position, anything more would just be me repeating myself in a greater volume, so no need to push it I think.

That, while being a debatable pro/con decision in it's own right, in no way supports your conclusion.