There are no wrong answers to these questions, and feel free to elaborate on them if you wish. For instance “C or D are both fine, and B can work in the right group” is a perfectly fine answer. So is a range (e.g, 5-8) in the 1-10 questions.
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being “kid gloves” and 10 requiring you to bring multiple backup characters to every session, how lethal would you like the campaign to be?
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being constant silliness and 10 being absolutely no jokes allowed, how serious would you like the campaign to be?
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being constantly in the background and 10 being a solo campaign, how much time in the limelight would you like you and your character to have?
According to the Player’s Handbook, the three pillars of adventure are exploration, social interaction, and combat. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being no interest and 10 being no interest in anything else, how much focus would you like each of these three pillars to have in the game?
What should happen when a player misses a session?
A) The character leaves the group for a time.
B) The DM controls the character on auto-pilot.
C) The group / a group member controls the character.
D) The session is cancelled or rescheduled.
E) Other (please mention)
When introducing a new member of the party, how should it be handled?
A) The PC is simply there, and always was.
B) Any excuse will do to bring the new PC in immediately, even if it's clearly shoehorned in.
C) Wait a little bit in the adventure if needed to find a moment that makes sense to introduce them.
D) Don't introduce a new PC until/unless it makes sense to do so, even if this means going short-handed for a full session or longer.
Should players work to optimise their characters?
Definitely. Players should plan out their builds well in advance to ensure maximum effectiveness.
Sort of. Players should take the good spells, feats, and options, but there’s no need to micromanage every tiny detail.
A little bit. Some things are just too good not to take, but there’s also plenty of room for customisation.
No. Optimised characters tend to be pretty samey. If you want to pick a “bad” race or a mishmash of random spells that fit your backstory, you go for it.
Definitely not! In fact, I hate optimised characters with a passion, and don’t want to play with them at all.
What is your opinion on in-character conflict within the group?
I dislike it. We’re a group, we work towards the common goal at all times.
Conflict should be resolved quickly, and not distract too much from the overall adventure.
Conflict is fine, and can persist across many sessions, as long as we can still do our job.
Players should act true to their characters, even if it means the group ends up breaking up or fights to the death.
Assuming the DM builds encounters fairly, how tactically should they play intelligent (human-level or above) adversaries?
A) Poorly. We're the heroes, after all. Let the enemies be disorganized and random.
B) Straightforward. They should use tactics, but only the obvious ones.
C) Clever. Intelligent enemies should work together, focus their fire, and generally act intelligent.
D) Deadly. Intelligent enemies have probably spent time thinking about their abilities and how best to use them, just like we have. Let them use their abilities as intelligently as the PC's would.
What types of content would you be uncomfortable experiencing in D&D? (For instance, I am uncomfortable with sexual violence happening to or by PC’s, so that won’t happen in this campaign.)
What would you most like to see in the campaign, that hasn’t yet been mentioned in the questionnaire?
What would you least like to see in the campaign, that hasn’t yet been mentioned in the questionnaire?
Are there any other comments you’d like to make, or preferences you’d like to express?