Testing the Layouts: Linear vs. Angular

Posted on 26/12/202526/12/2025 by nha cai tang tien

First up, I pitted two common 5-card layouts against each other. The first one I tried was the classic linear spread—sometimes called the “Problem/Action/Outcome” linear spread, but extended to five cards by adding “Foundation” and “Current Obstacle.” It’s straight lines, simple progression.

For the Love Situation: I focused my intent on this weird recurring misunderstanding I keep having with a close family member. I laid the cards out quickly: Foundation, Obstacle, Problem, Action, Outcome. That linear flow felt too restrictive. Card three (The Problem) felt like it was contradicting card four (The Action), which just muddied the water. It kept pointing toward a simple fix, like “just talk to them,” but my actual situation felt anything but simple. It skipped the nuance, like forcing a square peg into a round hole.
For the Career Situation: I used the exact same linear spread to look at whether I should take on this side project writing technical documentation. Here, the structure worked like a charm. Because career decisions are often about clear steps—A leads to B, B leads to C—the layout was incredibly efficient. It showed the foundation (my current financial need), the obstacle (my current lack of free time), and the required action (setting firm boundaries on hours). Clean, fast results. It told me exactly what I needed to do next.

Then I switched gears and tried a totally different arrangement—the “Star Spread,” or sometimes people call it the “Quincunx” layout. It’s shaped like an X or a diamond with a center card, focusing on the core issue and how everything rotates around it. This one is generally known for diving deeper into psychological stuff.

For the Love Situation: Bingo. This layout cracked the case. The central card (the Core Issue) hit me right in the gut—it was about my own fear of confrontation, not the misunderstanding itself. The surrounding four cards—representing influencing factors, past baggage, self-perception, and potential for growth—allowed the emotional narrative to breathe. It wasn’t about “what action to take,” but “why am I feeling this way,” which is what complicated relationship stuff often boils down to. It pulled out the messy details that the linear spread just totally skipped over.
For the Career Situation: It was overkill. When I used the Star Spread for the job decision, the results were too vague. The positions focusing on deep psychological factors didn’t help me decide if the pay was good enough or if the workload was manageable. It was like using a microscope to check a tire pressure gauge. I felt myself forcing the interpretation just to fit the positions, dragging my personal feelings into something that required only a logistical answer.

So, here’s the takeaway I locked down after pulling fifty-something cards over five days: If you need practical, sequential advice on getting paid or finishing a project, stick to spreads that lay out cause and effect clearly. If you are struggling with emotional knots, misunderstandings, or complex interpersonal dynamics, you need a layout that explores the center of the issue from multiple angles simultaneously.

Recent Posts