So, the inevitable has happened and celebrities playing DoND for charity is now a reality. Some anticipate very cautious play in light of the potential fear of being seen to have frittered away thousands of pounds of charity money. I don't - remember that the only £468k loss on Millionaire was a celebrity edition (yes, it got rescinded for question ambiguity, but the point is they went to the end), and I also recall that Tim Vine and partner gambled wildly and lost on a more recent celebrity Millionaire.

This poll isn't about what celebrities will do, though. It's about what you would do when playing for charity. Would you play it differently, and if so, how?

There's a case for all sorts of strategic deviations from your usual game plan - you could play more defensively in light of that fear of recklessness with charity cash, you could be more aggressive if you think that every pound counts equally for charity in a way it doesn't for individual people, you could play for a charity target that may or may not match any you have yourself.

My personal strategy would depend entirely on the charity I'm playing for. I'd try and play to what I sensed was their utility function, which would probably be very flat at these stakes for major national charities with multi-million-pound turnover, but anything but for a small local cause. (Actually, that would tie into another decision, which charity to play for, but that's another matter altogether...)

What's your take on this?

Probably the same as a normal game, really. Though the Banker may well make really low offers if he knew it was for charity, so...

I've gone for it would depend on the charity I was playing for. I don't have a charity of choice as such so perhaps if I was playing for a smaller, more local charity - I might be more target based.

I doubt I would be much more risk-taking than my usual method of playing though.

Knowing how much the Banker HATES anything to do with charity, I'd probably be forced to go on further than usual since he might make really low offers.

I think I agree here too.

There'd definitely be a temptation to be more cautious knowing that you're playing for a charity, but on the other hand, if you're overly cautious and/or target-based, you're denying the charity the chance of potentially winning one of the larger amounts.

I've always thought that charity editions wouldn't work, seeing as the banker is trying to save money (and the character of the banker hates charity) and he could just make low offers as a result. We'll find out in about 2 hours...

I think it would depend on the charity I was playing for. If I did not get to choose the charity I was playing for, then I would just go to the end and see what's in the box. If I chose the charity though, then I would be a lot more considerate and really put a lot of thought into the offers. I might also set my self a target. However, if the target was offered, and it wasn't really suitable for the board, then I would not take it.

I'd probably do the same as Holly.

And if I did get to choose the charity? One word - Oxfam.