I'm not really very clear as to the intentions of the OP and much less his fear that the questions he raise might result in a ban. I'm not even sure what the question is actually.
The comparison towards chess makes me think the OP means D&D as a generic game vs other games like the aforementioned chess, and I imagine others like Risk, Poker or Monopoly.
1) 13 is probably a fairly safe mark agewise where the players could probably organise themselves and play without supervision. With some guidance or supervision initially or an adult involved in the actual game younger is feasable depending on the kids in question.
2) The DM uses the rules as a very solid guideline to base his decisions upon when a situation enters a grey area that isn't explicitly defined in the rules. The DM when creating an encounter can alter things to fit the situation to his liking. He can also make a series of situational 'rules' like terrain features for example that are specific to that encounter. It is crucial that the DM is always consistent, fair and plays the game as a (near) neutral player. Mutual trust and respect is a very important. Otherwise you should expect the rules to be as they read.
3) Err ... satisfaction and disappointment? Lost me there I'm afraid. All classes are playable and competitive with each other. If you carefully design your character you can increase its effectiveness in combat. Personally I prefer to balance effectiveness in comabt with useful and versatile.
4) You should play the game with people who are enthused about it, are fun to play with, that you get along with and enjoy spending your time with. It's not a competitive game, i.e there is no 'winner'; winning = having a good time, overcoming the challenges you come across (set by the DM and altered depending on how you, as a team, chose to face those challenges). 4e especially is a team game as opposed to a group of individuals that do things together. The DM is not you adversary. He is judge and jury, instigator, painter of scenes, narrator, the embodiment of every character you meet on your adventures, be they friend or foe. His role is to put your team to the test, push you to the limit and challenge you in every way he can imagine, while maintaining complete objectivity.
5) Again, not to sure what you mean. But as DannyAlcatraz said, fair and consistent rulings are the basis. When that becomes too fuzzy, the next rule which is complimentary and not at all contradictory is 'follow the fun'.
6) Concentration on the game makes the game run more swiftly and more dynamically. Depending on your class and your powers there are still a vast number of things you may be able to do when its not your turn. Also, if you follow the game when its not your turn you can plan what you are going to do next. That way as soon as it is your turn you don't waste time humming and haaing which makes for a dynamic fast game.
0) Again I'm a bit lost as to your meaning. What depends on your philosophy? Whether the game works or not? Again I'll reiterate the importance of everyone contributing to the game. The fun is created by everyone, the adventure is instigated by the DM but the players bring it to life. The DM needs the players good will, energy and creativity as much as the players need the Dm's fairness, impartiality and ability to think on their feet (or preparation)
7) I have never played D&D for points. I don't consider it a competitive game. Something that was competitive would be a variation devised by the DM.
- I also play chess. My father taught me when I was 5. My son is 5 and I'm teaching him chess and D&D. He certainl enters into the D6D realm more easily. It's a world of imagination. My adult game would be completely inappropriate for children to participate in. I don't think any of my players would consider it 'kiddish'. Creativity and imagination take the game
-The information you are able to gather about something in an adventure depends greatly on you DM. There are ways to glean more information, certain skills like Streetwise, Insight, Perception, Nature, Arcana etc. which will be relevant in differeing situations. As a player you can explain why or how your character has insight on a certain issue and the DM based on the result of your roll compared to how difficult/beleivable your story (the DC he sets). He may also have preprepared clues and information for you to discover. Again a lot of that depends on you DM and their play style. DMs however should create multiple clues/sources of information/solutions/outcomes to situations and be versatile enough to take the players valid ideas and run with them.
the beauty of D&D is that you can go off the board. Chess is beautiful, but you can't go off the board. There is a very concrete goal. It's competitive. In D&D you set your characters goals. A good player will find ways that these become compatible with the Teams goals, which will change over the course of many adventures usually in relation to the present situation. It's not competitive. It's not about beating anyone. It's about being an active and relevant part of an awesome and memorable journey full of wonder, adventure, suffering and magic.
As far as character satisfaction, well 4e has a lot of options out there now. And they continue to grow. A lot of it are mechanics which can be completely re'fluffed' so the same powers have a totally different flavour. Characters in the end are what you make of them. The mechanics they are based on is just a slick, clean way to judge success or failure of certain actions. Again your comment is very vague so I'm not altogether sure what you mean here either.
