What would I have to change re: time and temp?
Sure. I would argue that, while roast chicken does really well at a higher heat (425), pieces should be cooked at a lower temp (375) simply because they have less mass and would tend to dry out quicker than a whole chicken. And they definitely won't take as long as a whole chicken, although I can't say off the top of my head how long. Ideally, your chicken pieces are skin-on. Otherwise, they will probably end up dry.
I would say, rub down the chicken with salt and pepper, and maybe a little olive oil or butter (I normally don't do that for whole chicken, but for chicken pieces it's insurance against dry meat). Roast at 375 for 30 minutes, skin side up. Check the temperature to see if they're done (165 degrees is officially "done" but you'll want to pull it out a little earlier because the internal temp will rise slightly as the meat rests), and proceed accordingly.
Mostly I agree with petitbleu on this, except that I would stay with the higher heat (425F) rather than the lower one. Just be sure to baste frequently with pan juices and maybe some white wine that you have on the side. The "official" 165F for doneness is simply way too high. That's a bureaucrat's idea of food safety. What you are after is a crispy skin (which you won't get at lower heat) but a moist interior. The rub down method is exactly what I would do also.
Pierino is not screaming at all because we liked ChefOno's answer. In fact our favorite chefs are Keller, David Chang and ChefOno. If you ask any of the chefs I know what their favorite meal to cook at home is, the answer will almost always be a roast chicken. Now for salmonella you could go for that spicey tuna roll, caught in south Asia and processed in California and shipped to New York.