How to Create a New Game in Planning Poker: A Practical Guide for Agile Teams

What Planning Poker is and why it matters

Planning Poker is more than a deck of cards. It’s a structured, time‑boxed dialogue that surfaces assumptions, clarifies uncertainties, and builds shared understanding about what it will take to complete a backlog item. By letting each member reveal their estimate privately, it reduces status influence and encourages honest input. The familiar Fibonacci‑like sequence (0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, etc.) کمک to reflect uncertainty: larger numbers imply more complexity and risk. A well‑designed Planning Poker game helps teams achieve consensus quickly and keeps estimation aligned with the team’s velocity and historical performance.

Before you start: prerequisites for a successful session

• Team composition: A typical Planning Poker session works best with a cross‑functional group of 3–9 participants. Too many voices can slow things down; too few can limit perspective. Include developers, testers, product owners, and a facilitator.
• Clear backlog items and acceptance criteria: Each item should have a well‑defined description and understood acceptance criteria. Ambiguity is the enemy of accurate estimation.
• Estimation scale choice: Decide on a unit (story points vs. ideal days) and the sequence you will use (classic Fibonacci vs. modified scale). The scale should be consistent across the project for comparability.
• Tools and environment: Choose between physical cards or a digital planning poker tool. Ensure everyone can see the card values, whether they are in the same room or remote.
• Facilitator readiness: The facilitator guides the session, manages time, clarifies questions, and keeps discussions focused on the story at hand.
• Timeboxing and cadence: Plan each session to run 20–45 minutes for a small backlog, longer if the backlog is large or complex. Establish a rhythm that can scale with your product, team size, and sprint cycle.

Having these prerequisites lined up in advance reduces friction and sets the stage for a smooth how to create a new game in Planning Poker workflow. The more explicit you are about goals, the quicker you’ll reach consensus and maintain momentum.

Step-by-step: how to create a new Planning Poker game

1. Define the estimation framework — Select your scale (story points with Fibonacci, T‑shirt sizes, or a simple 1–5 scale). Decide whether you will treat 0 as “no effort required” or reserve it for “already done” tasks. Document the scale in a team wiki or shared doc so everyone references the same values.
2. Prepare backlog items — Gather stories, technical tasks, and research spikes that require estimation. Ensure each item has a brief description, acceptance criteria, dependencies, and any known risks. Attach any relevant attachments or links to requirements.
3. Assign roles — Appoint a facilitator (Scrum Master or agile coach), a timekeeper, a scribe (to capture estimates and decisions), and the product owner (to answer clarifying questions). If your team uses rotating roles, rotate responsibilities to distribute practice and ownership.
4. Schedule and define the session scope — Determine the number of backlog items to cover, the session length, and the desired outcomes (e.g., a complete estimate for 8–12 items). Set expectations for the level of detail and how to handle items that require future clarification.
5. Set up tooling and environment — For physical Planning Poker, prepare a deck of cards, a timer, and a whiteboard or wall for recording results. For digital Planning Poker, choose a platform that supports private voting, reveal, discussion threads, and automatic consolidation of estimates. Ensure the digital tool is accessible to remote participants with stable connectivity.
6. Conduct a dry run (optional but recommended) — If the team is new to Planning Poker, run a quick practice session with two or three lightweight items to align on the process before estimating critical or high‑risk items.
7. Run the actual estimation rounds — For each backlog item: a) present the item with clarifying questions; b) let each participant select a card privately; c) reveal simultaneously; d) discuss outliers and reasons; e) re‑vote if consensus is not reached; f) record the final estimate and note any remaining ambiguities.
8. Document decisions and next steps — Save the final estimate for each item, note any assumptions, and capture any tasks created to resolve uncertainties. If a story has dependencies or risks, log those as separate items or follow‑ups for the next sprint planning.
9. Review and adjust the process — After the session, gather quick feedback. Note what went well (speed, clarity, collaboration) and what slowed the group (ambiguous stories, over‑long discussions). Iterate on the process for the next session.

Following these steps helps you create a repeatable, scalable Planning Poker workflow that aligns with your product development cadence and team culture. The emphasis should be on clarity, collaboration, and delivering estimates that reflect the team’s actual velocity over time.

Variants and styles: choosing how your session unfolds

Planning Poker isn’t one‑size‑fits‑all. Different teams adapt the format to suit their domain, workflow, and remote collaboration needs. Here are some common variants you may consider when creating a new game in Planning Poker:

• The standard approach with private card selections, simultaneous reveal, and discussion until consensus is reached. Best for co‑located teams or well‑aligned remote teams.
• Participants hide their estimates and only the facilitator reveals the result after a quiet round of explanation. This can reduce groupthink and encourage independent thinking.
• Introduce roles such as "Architect," "Developer," and "Tester" to highlight different perspectives before reaching a single consensus.
• For very large or uncertain backlogs, use T‑shirt sizes (XS–XL) or relative estimation to quickly bucket stories before translating to story points.
• Limit each item to a fixed number of minutes and move on if the discussion becomes unproductive, returning later for a quick reconciliation if needed.

When you pick a variant, document it in your team handbook so everyone follows the same rules. Consistency matters for comparability and for measuring improvement over multiple sprints.

Tools and environments: physical cards vs. digital planning poker

Choosing the right tool can significantly impact engagement and accuracy. Here’s a quick comparison to help you decide how to create a new game in Planning Poker in your preferred setup:

• — Pros: tactile experience, easy to use; transparent for small teams; no screen dependencies. Cons: harder to use for remote teams, tracking history can be manual, requires physical presence.
• Digital Planning Poker tools — Pros: excellent for remote teams, built‑in history/logs, supports private voting and instant aggregation, easier to enforce standard scales. Cons: requires internet access and a chosen platform; some tools may have a learning curve.
• Hybrid approaches — Use physical cards for in‑person moments and a digital tool to share the final backlog and historical data. This can offer the best of both worlds, especially for distributed teams or organizations migrating from analog to digital workflows.

Top considerations when selecting a tool include accessibility for all participants, the ability to attach backlog item details, integration with your project management system (e.g., Jira, Azure DevOps), and the ease of exporting estimates to your sprint backlog. Regardless of the format, the emphasis remains on clear storytelling, shared understanding, and curated backlog details.

Example run: a practical walkthrough

Let’s walk through a hypothetical session with a small team estimating four backlog items for a new feature: a user authentication module. The team uses a Fibonacci scale (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21) and a digital planning poker tool for a distributed setup.

1. “As a user, I want to log in with email and password.” The facilitator describes acceptance criteria: password strength, login errors, and lockout after multiple failed attempts. After clarifying questions, each team member privately selects a card. Cards are revealed: 5, 5, 8, 5, 8. The group discusses, noting that a security review might impact implementation. Consensus forms around 8 story points.
2. “As a user, I want to reset my password via email.” The initial estimates are 3, 3, 2, 3, 3. Discussions reveal a need for email templates and rate limiting. Consensus settles at 3 story points.
3. “As an admin, I want to audit login attempts.” Estimates diverge (8, 13, 8, 13, 8). After clarifying the required audit log fields and retention window, the team agrees on 8 story points, acknowledging potential backend changes.
4. “As a user, I want to stay signed in for 14 days.” Privacy and security concerns surface. After questions about token lifetimes and refresh logic, the team reaches 13 story points, with a note to revisit during design refinement.

In this example, you can see how the process surfaces uncertainties, aligns on scope, and captures assumptions. The final backlog looks clean, with each item tied to a story point estimate and explanatory notes for future refinement. If any item lacks clarity, the facilitator marks it for a follow‑up discussion or a spike task before sprint planning.

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

• People may anchor on early estimates. Counter this by encouraging independent thinking first (private card choice) and asking for rationale before discussion.
• Avoid long monologues that derail the session. Focus on acceptance criteria, not every technical detail unless it affects effort.
• Ensure each item has explicit criteria to define success. Without it, estimates reflect ambiguity more than effort.
• Use timeboxing to keep conversations focused, and if needed, defer low‑impact items to a later refinement session.
• Use the same scale throughout the project. Document any deviations and the rationale for future reference.

Anticipating these pitfalls and applying quick mitigations helps you improve estimation accuracy and keeps planning sessions productive and inclusive.

Best practices for remote and distributed teams

Remote Planning Poker requires thoughtful logistics. Here are practical tips to ensure your team can create a new game in Planning Poker effectively when members are dispersed:

• Use a reliable video conferencing tool with screen sharing and chat features to supplement verbal discussion.
• Choose a planning tool with private voting, real‑time updates, and clear history per item.
• Set a shared time zone and standard session time to reduce scheduling friction.
• Offer asynchronous options for follow‑ups when time zones or bandwidth limit live sessions; record decisions and post them in a central backlog document.
• Encourage documented rationale for each estimate to aid future analysis and onboarding of new team members.

Remote success hinges on clear communication, robust tooling, and disciplined adherence to the standard estimation process.

FAQ: quick answers to common questions

What is the most common planning poker scale?

The Fibonacci sequence (0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21) is widely used because it captures uncertainty and diminishing returns as estimates grow. Some teams customize the scale to their domain.

How long should a Planning Poker session last?

For a small backlog (8–12 items), 20–45 minutes is typical. Larger backlogs or more complex features may require longer sessions or multiple rounds.

Should a single person lead all planning poker sessions?

Consistency helps, but rotating the facilitator can build team ownership. The facilitator should be proficient in guiding discussions, clarifying questions, and keeping time.

What if consensus cannot be reached?

Use a second round of voting after addressing blockers or ambiguities. If still unresolved, create a spike item or schedule a separate refinement session to gather more information.

Takeaways and what to do next

Creating a sustainable Planning Poker practice starts with a clear structure, consistent rules, and a focus on shared understanding. By carefully preparing backlog items, selecting an appropriate estimation scale, and choosing the right tools for your team configuration, you can implement a robust game that accelerates planning, improves forecast accuracy, and reduces rework. The key is to iterate: collect feedback after each session, refine your approach, and gradually scale the process to larger backlogs or multiple teams. As teams gain confidence, you will notice faster convergence, better alignment with product goals, and a smoother path from backlog to sprint execution.