Editing Fiat Campaign (section)

==Mechanics==
The players and/or referees sit down, discuss the previous game, and project an outcome. That's pretty much it. The primary appeal of the fiat campaign is that it takes almost no setup. With a reliable, dispassionate GM and mature players, they can be incredibly [[awesome]]. But when they go bad, [[Not as planned|they go ''legendarily'' bad]].

Fiat campaigns put an extraordinary load on the referees, and are by far the most difficult campaigns to balance well. Most of the other campaign systems have a means to pawn off the inherent drama when people disagree about what "should" happen, decrease the massive workload so your GM(s) don't burn out, and keep your slightly-bad apples from completely destroying a group. The best way to run a fiat campaign is with several judges, none of whom are playing in the campaign itself; this is how the military keeps their own campaigns under control. But no gamer really wants to [[Forever GM|sit out of the rest of the club's activities for days or weeks of real time]]. 

They're also the most drama-prone, since there's no one to blame but yourself and the ref when you lose. And we all know how much [[That Guy]] likes to blame everyone BUT himself; [[Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies|That Referee]] isn't much better. Since there are no real mechanics, a biased system or referee becomes impossible to contain without walking off or forcing them out. So fiat campaigns have a very bad reputation among gamers, no matter what the individual may call it.