I finally got to talk to my players about getting away from the usual Firefly - smugglers taking odd jobs style game, and they were very supportive of the idea. The concept that stuck most was having them play as undercover Imperial agents tasked with taking down a Rebel cell from within. So running with that, I drew up some goals.

• This is a deniable operation. Only a select few in the Empire know anything about this action, so they can't call backup, call a timeout in a shootout, and if the get captured, the superiors behind the operation will deny their existence and let them rot in prison.
• My group LOVES obligation. So that has to stay. My idea is that as they hinder Rebel ops, sabotage things, and secretly report troop movements to their superiors, they gain a Suspicion obligation. People start noticing that the group is involved with a lot of operations that fail. Suspicion is removed in two ways: First, time. The longer they're part of the Rebellion, the less people suspect them. Second, demonstrating loyalty. By taking direction action against the Empire, they can convert Suspicion on a one-for-one basis to Guilt. This reinforces the heavy strain upon them, being double agents and all.
• The Empire is bad... I'm very much of the opinion that the Empire may be more stable than the Republic, but it is evil on the whole. So while the players are loyalists and will probably have pro-Empire motivations, I want to confront them with the side of the Empire that that might make them reconsider. Not every loyalist is pure evil - some are genuinely good people. But by and large, the Empire is bad.
• By the same token, the Alliance is not all good. Sometimes, the Empire is right in labeling them terrorists. The players should see this and take solace in the fact that they are preventing terrorism.
• The players have a choice. As they make friends within the Rebel Alliance and get a darker view of the Empire, they should have to face a choice about whether or not they really support the Empire any more.

So those are the goals. And from that, I drew up a basic list of plot ideas.

• Routine Alliance missions - protect convoys, engage in guerrilla warfare, sabotage Imperial supply lines, etc.
• Make intel drops for their superiors. They're required to drop intel in places where the Empire can pick it up regarding troop movements, plans, etc, and secretly, lest people suspect them.
• Genuine terrorist actions, which show that the Alliance isn't always in the right. Cue more Guilt obligation.
• Survive the operations that they've sabotaged. They've warned the Empire about an operation, and the hammer is going to come down. They need to survive Alliance missions that fail badly.
• Deal with aliens, especially those that are heavily oppressed and mistreated by the Empire.
• Deal with people defecting to join the Alliance. Particularly a person who would know them, but not know about their mission. If they're not already selling themselves to the Alliance as Imperial deserters, then this could raise a lot of suspicions.
• Rescue a Rebel spy who was, unbeknownst to any of them, conditioned into a sleeper agent, that betrays the Alliance against his will. This shows a very negative aspect of the Empire.

That's what I've got thus far, but I'm looking for more suggestions, particularly specifics on how being a double agent ties into the Alliance missions the players get involved in.

When their superiors can get intel on the missions they're running for the Rebels, I'd send them on mission-within-a-mission objectives.

Staging a raid on an Imperial convoy? The Empire is willing to write the haul off as an acceptable loss if you can access the convoy's computers and identify the traitor who gave up intel to the Rebels.

Being sent to capture a high-value asset? Make sure that he's killed before he talks.

Attaches on a diplomatic mission to bring an undecided world into the Alliance? Stage a terror attack and make it look like Rebel freedom fighters were responsible.

The PCs get news that the Empire is going to let them take out a high-ranking Imperial. One that hasn't been doing his job well, been disloyal. Purging him is already beneficial for the Empire itself, but also strengthens the PCs cover.

They soon find some horrible corrupt Moff to assassinate. However right before they start planning the mission they hear their superiors have another victim in mind. One of the nicer Imperials, the officer that favors the soft touch, bends his orders to be less harsh on civilians. A moral quandary for the PCs.

Secretly make one of the players a double-double-agent, tasked with infiltrating the Imperials for the Rebel Alliance who just happened to get assigned to the deep-cover Rebel Alliance mission. Don't tell the other players.

I almost ran something similar to this funnily enough. Like shadeleader, I had the idea of making every mission have two objectives. So in this example, I'd have the objective the Rebels give them and then a secret objective from the Empire. The difficulty would be balancing the two, too many failed Empire objectives and their handler suspects they've gone rogue. I think you've found a cool way to deal with that though with guilt and suspicion.

Basically I planned to rip-off both 24 and Splinter Cell Double Agent. I had some really sneaky scenarios ready for the players where they'd have to balance the mission against their own ideals. I had a grumpy character in mind too that would distrust them, giving them someone to try win over or even frame for their own sabotage depending on what the players chose to do.

How are you going to have them communicating with their imperial contacts? It could be a lot of fun if you use a dead drop system where they have to go to a certain store on a certain planet to get and leave messages or have a couple different drop locations.

Their first assignment should be to create a list of rebels with as much information about them as they can. I would have them go several sessions acting purly as rebels with no secondary missions so they can establish themselves as true rebels. during these missions they should be gathering as much information as possible. Names, skills, equipment, missions etc.. that they can drop after a few months on the first dead drop. Then a few weeks go by and they are assigned a new mission when they return to the dead drop.

Also you may want them to be gathering information and sabotaging missions that they are not assigned to making them harder to track. I.E. gathering information around the base and reporting missions assigned to other groups. all of the actions they directly take for the rebels would be legitimate though they may take occasional actions to soften the blow to the empire such as kill a high profile target instead of capturing him because it was unavoidable etc...

If the imperials want an intelligence group they would benefit by letting that group become established and rise though the rebel ranks before risking them and then use the group sparingly until it is really necessary.

Eventually something big enough will come up that the group will have to risk everything to prevent it and may even expose themselves.

1) Go triple agent, play an Imperial spy working for the Rebellion by leaking disinformation both ways so both sides suffer to a different extent.

This means they're already under suspicion and use this to further their own agenda which requires both sides to naturally suspect them unaware what's really going on.

For example a Jedi-Hunter whose hunting the Jedi that betrayed his family in the early days of Order 66 and before who actually sympathetic to the Rebellion but has a harsh code of honour that is why he's trusted by the Empire.

So he'd risk his life to save a friend whether rebel or imperial but shows no mercy to those that needlessly endangers life so he'd naturally take down a particularly bloodthirsty rebel cell and will help another cell if they're trying to save lives.

2) Remember the Senator from the Rebels series?

Frame someone for their crimes make sure they're not close enough to raise suspicions of them when they do so of course!

When their superiors can get intel on the missions they're running for the Rebels, I'd send them on mission-within-a-mission objectives.

Staging a raid on an Imperial convoy? The Empire is willing to write the haul off as an acceptable loss if you can access the convoy's computers and identify the traitor who gave up intel to the Rebels.

Being sent to capture a high-value asset? Make sure that he's killed before he talks.

Attaches on a diplomatic mission to bring an undecided world into the Alliance? Stage a terror attack and make it look like Rebel freedom fighters were responsible.

I like the mission-within-a-mission idea a lot.

The PCs get news that the Empire is going to let them take out a high-ranking Imperial. One that hasn't been doing his job well, been disloyal. Purging him is already beneficial for the Empire itself, but also strengthens the PCs cover.

They soon find some horrible corrupt Moff to assassinate. However right before they start planning the mission they hear their superiors have another victim in mind. One of the nicer Imperials, the officer that favors the soft touch, bends his orders to be less harsh on civilians. A moral quandary for the PCs.

This is a great idea, especially if the Moff that they're allowed to kill is actually close to defecting, and that's why the Empire decided he needed to die. This is totally the manipulation that the Empire would go for. Everything has an ulterior motive under the surface.

I almost ran something similar to this funnily enough. Like shadeleader, I had the idea of making every mission have two objectives. So in this example, I'd have the objective the Rebels give them and then a secret objective from the Empire. The difficulty would be balancing the two, too many failed Empire objectives and their handler suspects they've gone rogue. I think you've found a cool way to deal with that though with guilt and suspicion.

Basically I planned to rip-off both 24 and Splinter Cell Double Agent. I had some really sneaky scenarios ready for the players where they'd have to balance the mission against their own ideals. I had a grumpy character in mind too that would distrust them, giving them someone to try win over or even frame for their own sabotage depending on what the players chose to do.

So if my group is typically running at 80-90 obligation (and have a blast doing it), do I introduce another obligation regarding their handler's suspicion of them going rogue?

I've never seen 24, but I Wiki'ed it, and the wiki pages do a great job of breaking up each season into 3 acts and clearly labeling all subplots. It's a great place to borrow ideas from.

Was this grumpy character a handler or a Rebel ally?

How are you going to have them communicating with their imperial contacts? It could be a lot of fun if you use a dead drop system where they have to go to a certain store on a certain planet to get and leave messages or have a couple different drop locations.

Their first assignment should be to create a list of rebels with as much information about them as they can. I would have them go several sessions acting purly as rebels with no secondary missions so they can establish themselves as true rebels. during these missions they should be gathering as much information as possible. Names, skills, equipment, missions etc.. that they can drop after a few months on the first dead drop. Then a few weeks go by and they are assigned a new mission when they return to the dead drop.

Also you may want them to be gathering information and sabotaging missions that they are not assigned to making them harder to track. I.E. gathering information around the base and reporting missions assigned to other groups. all of the actions they directly take for the rebels would be legitimate though they may take occasional actions to soften the blow to the empire such as kill a high profile target instead of capturing him because it was unavoidable etc...

If the imperials want an intelligence group they would benefit by letting that group become established and rise though the rebel ranks before risking them and then use the group sparingly until it is really necessary.

Eventually something big enough will come up that the group will have to risk everything to prevent it and may even expose themselves.

I had the dead drop in mind, for minimum suspicion. If doubles came up on their handler's Suspicion, he might require a face to face (holo) meeting at an extremely awkward time for them. To evaluate their psyches and all. I'm considering giving them multiple handlers with different motives. One just wants the Rebel cell dead. Another wants to manipulate the cell into discrediting the Alliance in general. Another suspects that a padawan survivor of Order 66 is in the ranks, and values his death above anything else. Etc.

I figured that the players would only run the important missions, so between every session, it's assumed that they go on some fairly mundane missions and gather some basic intel. Actually, I did a bounty hunting montage once, to get the players set up with some higher level bounties faster, and it went over really well. Basically, I gave them a bounty, and each player was allowed a single skill check of their choice to reflect how they went about locating the target. Then we did a second round of stalking, where they got into advantageous positions and took aim. Lastly, there was a final round of skill checks which were opposed by the target's skill checks to do a take down scene. We went very narrative heavy for the montage, and jumped through three bounties in 15 minutes, and the players enjoyed it... Every session could start with one or two missions in a montage that lead up to the primary mission for the session, and thus we skip the to the exciting bits.

since your group already has such a high obligation I would use the duty mechanic to keep track of their superiors suspicions of them. you could run two sets of duty one for the empire and one for the rebels. As they perform missions for the rebels they gain duty in the alliance. When they perform tasks for pass along data for the empire they are given duty for the empire. The rewards for the empire should be higher as they will also be more important but less frequent. If one duty scale outpaces the other by too great a margin than the other side become suspicious. If their alliance duty is much higher than the empire duty than their handlers think they are defecting to the alliance. if the imperial duty is too high then the rebels begin to suspect the party of being spies because they have been link to too many "leaks" or "failures". I would track this in my DM notes and not tell the players about it at all so they have to keep guessing about their actions. Plus you can keep using the duty mechanic in open game play allowing the players to keep enjoying it.

Obligation or duty would both work well I think. I'm a GM who tends to fudge the rules from time to time in favour of simplified fun, so what I had in mind for my story was two separate counters, one to measure trust with the Rebels and one for trust with the Empire. Certain significant actions would increase their trust with one, but decrease it with the other group. There would also be lots of other things to individually increase trust with just one group, but a lot of the time it would be a balancing act.

An example would be if the Rebels had captured an Imperial prisoner and ordered your PCs to interrogate them. Helping the prisoner secretly escape would earn Empire trust but trigger a loss of Rebel trust, as it looks suspicious. Killing the prisoner on purpose would be the closest thing to a middle ground, as it denies the Rebels information but could be done to look like a mistake. But that said, they still just killed an Empire soldier. Are they willing to do that? I basically wanted to promote creative thinking, how can they pull off their missions by pleasing both sides and not compromise their own views? I was hoping they'd surprise me!

The idea was I wanted the players to have to weigh up the cost of every action. Losing full trust with the Empire means they're cut loose, they're considered rogue. Losing it all with the Rebels means their cover is blown, they're clearly up to something. I had the story set out so that the Rebels had a big final plan but the PCs had to stick around and earn trust long enough to find out what it was... Like I said, I ripped off Splinter Cell

Oh and sorry for the vague comment about the "grumpy character". To elaborate, what I had planned was that the Rebels would have a member of the group who would vocally oppose the PCs joining the Rebel cell, but have to reluctantly work with them. I thought it would give the players a rival for the Rebel leader's trust and also keep them on their toes. He was also going to be a tool for me to represent their trust level in role play, ie. "Hmm maybe you're not so bad after all..." Vs. "I know you're up to something! Once I prove it you're dead!" I figured the Rebel cell leader had to have faith in them right away as otherwise the plot doesn't make much sense, why would they let them join, right? I felt there had to be a character who didn't like them so there was some resistance.

I am attaching a link about a WWII spy who i always found fascinating. He is a double agent who convinved the Natizis that the allied invasion of normandy was fake... while it was happening. if i remember correctly he got the highest award for espionage from both the allies and the natizis for his actions. a great story which could lead to some interesting campaign ideas.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/58468/most-amazing-lie-history

since your group already has such a high obligation I would use the duty mechanic to keep track of their superiors suspicions of them. you could run two sets of duty one for the empire and one for the rebels. As they perform missions for the rebels they gain duty in the alliance. When they perform tasks for pass along data for the empire they are given duty for the empire. The rewards for the empire should be higher as they will also be more important but less frequent. If one duty scale outpaces the other by too great a margin than the other side become suspicious. If their alliance duty is much higher than the empire duty than their handlers think they are defecting to the alliance. if the imperial duty is too high then the rebels begin to suspect the party of being spies because they have been link to too many "leaks" or "failures". I would track this in my DM notes and not tell the players about it at all so they have to keep guessing about their actions. Plus you can keep using the duty mechanic in open game play allowing the players to keep enjoying it.

The group isn't formed yet, and per Age of Rebellion character creation, won't have any starting Obligation. Having separate Duties, however, one for the Empire and one for the Rebellion, is an excellent idea, and the Rebel Duty can be used to track how well they're infiltrating and rising through the ranks covertly. Obligation, however, lets each side's suspicion be independent of perceived contribution (Duty). Duty fluctuates too wildly during promotion to track trust. Otherwise no one trusts them after a promotion.

Obligation or duty would both work well I think. I'm a GM who tends to fudge the rules from time to time in favour of simplified fun, so what I had in mind for my story was two separate counters, one to measure trust with the Rebels and one for trust with the Empire. Certain significant actions would increase their trust with one, but decrease it with the other group. There would also be lots of other things to individually increase trust with just one group, but a lot of the time it would be a balancing act.

An example would be if the Rebels had captured an Imperial prisoner and ordered your PCs to interrogate them. Helping the prisoner secretly escape would earn Empire trust but trigger a loss of Rebel trust, as it looks suspicious. Killing the prisoner on purpose would be the closest thing to a middle ground, as it denies the Rebels information but could be done to look like a mistake. But that said, they still just killed an Empire soldier. Are they willing to do that? I basically wanted to promote creative thinking, how can they pull off their missions by pleasing both sides and not compromise their own views? I was hoping they'd surprise me!

The idea was I wanted the players to have to weigh up the cost of every action. Losing full trust with the Empire means they're cut loose, they're considered rogue. Losing it all with the Rebels means their cover is blown, they're clearly up to something. I had the story set out so that the Rebels had a big final plan but the PCs had to stick around and earn trust long enough to find out what it was... Like I said, I ripped off Splinter Cell

Oh and sorry for the vague comment about the "grumpy character". To elaborate, what I had planned was that the Rebels would have a member of the group who would vocally oppose the PCs joining the Rebel cell, but have to reluctantly work with them. I thought it would give the players a rival for the Rebel leader's trust and also keep them on their toes. He was also going to be a tool for me to represent their trust level in role play, ie. "Hmm maybe you're not so bad after all..." Vs. "I know you're up to something! Once I prove it you're dead!" I figured the Rebel cell leader had to have faith in them right away as otherwise the plot doesn't make much sense, why would they let them join, right? I felt there had to be a character who didn't like them so there was some resistance.

Simple is usually better... I chose Obligation because it is simple.

The "grumpy" resistance figure is a great idea, and I feel like he's the sort where his allies would say, "Don't mind so-and-so; he doesn't trust anyone." But he could still keep the players paranoid and be an antagonist of sorts withing the Rebellion. Suspicion among the Rebel leadership would be significantly worse than suspicion among the regular troops (the grumpy character), and if doubles ever came up on rebel Suspicion, they'd have to decide if they were going to kill the man with evidence against them or let him report in and face trial. Obviously the former is better, right?

MuttonchopMac Duty fluctuates too wildly during promotion to track trust. Otherwise no one trusts them after a promotion.

remember that while the duty dropps back down after you hit 100 you gain a rank in duty. The idea being that the rewards get steadily better each time you hit 100.

So even though your duty may only be 5 if you have a rank of 1 they wil already have a level of trust for you.

Seems likly you have a good system worked out with obligation so I would use what you are comfrotable with I just wanted to point out that in the grand scheme of things duty keeps going up.