On page 24 of the rulebook, it says "For coexistence battles, the Traitor player is always the defender"

On page 40, in the glossary under Defender it says: "... (Exception: In coexistence battles, the Traitor player is always the attacker)"

Which is correct?

Also on page 40, in the glossary under Attacker it says: "...(Exception: In coexistence battles, the Imperial player is always the attacker)"

That's 2 out of 3 claiming the Traitor is always the defender so we've been playing that way but some official clarification would be nice.

Thanks

-Kevin

FWIW, we've also been playing "Traitor is always defender".

TK

Someone really needs to start a thread devoted to these kinds of things they find in the rules, so theyre all in one spot and can be easily found. It will help FFG get a FAQ out.

Ive seen about 2-3 of these conflicts so far.

I myself would go with what is written in the rules vice the glossery. It just seems more official.

Page 40, under Attacker also says "in coexistence combat the Imperial player is always the attacker", which puts the conflicting rules 2-1 in favour of the Traitor player always being defender.

Where's the FAQ?

* EDIT * D'oh - you already said that.

I listened to a podcast once where they had an interview with the designer. He stated that the Imperial player is supposed to be the attacker, to give the traitor a tiny bit of an edge (because he gets to choose who is the active player first).

I don't remember which podcast that was though :-(

Yup, I remember that interview. It also has a review of the game as well. It was done by the D6 generation. Linky .