Let me start with, I don't currently own Age of Rebellion, only Edge of the Empire.

I'm thinking of running a Star Wars game and the PC's will be Imperial Agents. They are being sent to a world where Rebels have been making attacks using Imperial weapons. It's believed that they are being supplied by someone in the Empire. The PC's job is to stop the Rebel cell, determine who is supplying the weapons and bring them to Imperial justice.

Do you think Age of Rebellion or Edge of the Empire would be the better system to use. I'm leaning towards AoR.

I'm also looking for suggestions or recommendations for sources I can look at to run this type of game. One part will be a mole hunt, looking for the Imperial traitor. I really want to get that right as most of our games tend to be hack and slash. I think a more "thinky" game would be fun.

AoR is technically a better fit. The Specs and Duty mechanic is just more appropriate for what you're wanting.

That's the down side of the 2 core system. If you really wanna rock out with your blaster out, you gotta pony up the credits for all three core books.

That's the plan, I just need to wait until next month to get the core book. I just wanted to get a jump start on working on the campaign.

The AoR CB does have careers that lend them well to Imperial characters and such a group. Soldier, spy, ace, etc. and their respective specs.

To be honest this is the type of game where the capability of both AOR and EOTE come into play. The question is who the PC's are and what they are doing before they are sent on this mission. If they are strictly Imperial's then AOR would work the best, but that type of mission might include a few hired PC's. A bounty hunter, a colonist, or another fringe style character. One PC might be your local point of contact (ie a Colonist). I think you waiting to get the AOR CB is a great option and should use it as well as EOTE.

Talk to your players to decide if they want to use Obligation or Duty. With the type of game your going for I would not limit yourself to one or the other.

Cool, I hadn't thought about having players be non-Imperials. Having a "local" on the planet would help out in there investigation.

Thanks for the idea.

And completely off topic, does anyone remember the old West End Games Imperial Source book? I was looking through mine last night and I had forgotten about the Super Star Destroyer silhouette covering 8 pages of the book. I thought that was a good representation of the scale of the ship.

And apparently the Executor is too short. 11 pages long and it's still too short.

Let me start with, I don't currently own Age of Rebellion, only Edge of the Empire.

I'm thinking of running a Star Wars game and the PC's will be Imperial Agents. They are being sent to a world where Rebels have been making attacks using Imperial weapons. It's believed that they are being supplied by someone in the Empire. The PC's job is to stop the Rebel cell, determine who is supplying the weapons and bring them to Imperial justice.

Do you think Age of Rebellion or Edge of the Empire would be the better system to use. I'm leaning towards AoR.

I'm also looking for suggestions or recommendations for sources I can look at to run this type of game. One part will be a mole hunt, looking for the Imperial traitor. I really want to get that right as most of our games tend to be hack and slash. I think a more "thinky" game would be fun.

Cool, go for it!

Age of Rebellion isbetter for the group as a whole (Duty and such), but a sprinkle of Edge or F&D Beta for specific characters (bounty hunters, dark Jedi, etc.) can certainly work.

The only trouble I ran into is the Agitator's Incite Rebellion talent. Simply rename it "Inspire Loyalty" and have it cause obedience instead, and the Agitator becomes a great ISB Agent (or even a 40k Commissar)!

AoR is a good fit, but EOTE and F&D can also work with to add sprinkles.

Yeah, I'm a combat heavy GM but I've been learning to do some more of a laid back Dark Heresy investigating adventures too so here's my advice.

First suggestion will be to have all your main NPCs have their own wants and desires. They are not going to coincide with the players who are disrupting their day to day lives. For example, the Imperial Colonel who is the garrison commander is not going to like some upstarts that just show up at his base one day and start asking questions. This is especially true if your cover story is to inspect and make sure the troops are up to snuff. Everyone has skeletons in their closet.

Secondly, this is important and one thing I learned when doing the best Feng Shui adventure, let the players figure out who the culprit is. This eliminates them trying to guess you and also allows them to give a plausible reason why the Moff (or someone else entirely!) would want to fund a local Rebel group.

Thirdly, keep the plot points brief, they have a goal and they need to investigate it. They should try and follow any leads they come up with, such as player one who states, "You know, smuggling scum always hang out at a cantina. Let's go there and rough up some people and get some answers." If they derail your notes entirely, just roll with it. You should make it vague enough that they gain the clues there and it'll be fun for them to try and find the leads on their own.

Thanks for the ideas, that will help me a lot.

I'll have to dig out my DH core book and look up running investigations.

At the Triumph and Despair blog (google, for some reason I can't paste links on FFGs forums...) there is a custom campaign idea called "Crush the Rebellion" which even has its own mechanic (like Obligation, Duty, Morality etc) called 'Secret Agenda' which is the idea that each of them are working towards completing a secret agenda which may shape how the campaign eventually shapes out.

The Empire are considered 'evil' so I'd try and play the PC's against each other, not directly but behind the scenes and would definitely make sure that the campaign eventually ends with only one of the PC's surviving (preferably the others dying in the same session).

The Empire are considered 'evil' so I'd try and play the PC's against each other, not directly but behind the scenes and would definitely make sure that the campaign eventually ends with only one of the PC's surviving (preferably the others dying in the same session).

Might be fun, but remember that sort of competitive pvp stuff really only works if everyone on the table agrees beforehand. The only game that works 24/7 is Paranoia and that is design to not really cause actual table drama as everyone just explodes due to shenanigans and the GM just having his mouth agape at the whole event unfolding. But yeah, try and get all the players in agreement beforehand how their Star Wars: Dark Heresy edition will play out.

Dark Heresy is also good to refer to as I was in an Only War campaign that used elements of that game due to the fact the Malevolent Forces of Chaos had infiltrated the Imperial Quartermaster and it was up to one Overzealous Imperial Guard squad to save the day.

At the Triumph and Despair blog (google, for some reason I can't paste links on FFGs forums...) there is a custom campaign idea called "Crush the Rebellion" which even has its own mechanic (like Obligation, Duty, Morality etc) called 'Secret Agenda' which is the idea that each of them are working towards completing a secret agenda which may shape how the campaign eventually shapes out.

The Empire are considered 'evil' so I'd try and play the PC's against each other, not directly but behind the scenes and would definitely make sure that the campaign eventually ends with only one of the PC's surviving (preferably the others dying in the same session).

That's where I got my idea from.