How many cards to represent an object?

Sigmar

I am looking for opinions on how many cards you would use to represent an object (person, place, thing, event). What I am looking to do is define a spread where two objects (aka players or actors) are compared, then cards representing their encounter are played and interpreted.

Right now I am looking to simply draw two or more 'actors' from the deck and play out their interaction. Later I will be looking to specify cards for a one or more of the actors (either by pulling them out of the deck or writing the attributive cards down) then drawing for unknown actors or for the interaction. That's another post for another part of the forum.

My first thought is to use 4 or 5 cards for each actor then 1 less for the interaction. I was thinking on doing a pyramid up to 1 where the actors are the base and the interaction is centred on top. Then cards are drawn till only 1 card is on top. I think I am getting way to far ahead of myself and would like to figure out first the actors and interaction.

Also are there any suggestions on figuring how many actors to draw? I was thinking either some form of numerology, by feel, or by a die roll.

Thanks,
Sigmar

rhombchick

Woah!

This post is kinda like walking in on your parents doing "it"

Lol

Read it, all innocent, thinking I could help, but instead i just got very very confused.

*Backs out slowly and closes the door*

Generally speaking though, I would say just to go by feel.
If it were my spread I would just pull cards until I felt I had enough, but as it is your spread, 'go by feel' means exactly that, go by what you feel is right.
If you feel that rolling a dice is what you need to do then go for it....

IMO

Debra

It would be helpful to explain your purpose.

You aren't distinguishing people from objects?

So...are you talking about using tarot for some kind of game, or role-playing, rather than for divination and insight? Or some kind of algorithm? Because then you can do whatever.

I don't know of a tarot reader who wouldn't distinguish a person from a thing.

Sheri

Sigmar said:
I am looking for opinions on how many cards you would use to represent an object (person, place, thing, event). What I am looking to do is define a spread where two objects (aka players or actors) are compared, then cards representing their encounter are played and interpreted.

Right now I am looking to simply draw two or more 'actors' from the deck and play out their interaction. Later I will be looking to specify cards for a one or more of the actors (either by pulling them out of the deck or writing the attributive cards down) then drawing for unknown actors or for the interaction. That's another post for another part of the forum.

My first thought is to use 4 or 5 cards for each actor then 1 less for the interaction. I was thinking on doing a pyramid up to 1 where the actors are the base and the interaction is centred on top. Then cards are drawn till only 1 card is on top. I think I am getting way to far ahead of myself and would like to figure out first the actors and interaction.

Also are there any suggestions on figuring how many actors to draw? I was thinking either some form of numerology, by feel, or by a die roll.

Thanks,
Sigmar

Hi Sigmar,

If you are comparing things, it is possible that the number of cards you would need to pull would vary depending on what you were asking about... for example, you might need 4 cards when comparing an old home to a new one (should I move or stay put) versus 3 for people (what do they bring from their past, what they bring to the relationship now, what will they be like in the future in this relationship, etc.).

I very often use 2 columns to compare things or people (which of these 2 guys should I date) to one another with the same position in each column. Then you can add an additional column that represents what the combination of the 2 would be like. The technique is the same but the important aspects are different.

If you have problems coming up with positions or attributes for what you are comparing, just think of it in terms of questions... what would you want to know about that particular item... that becomes one of the positions, etc.

Sheri

Sigmar

rhombchick said:
Woah!
This post is kinda like walking in on your parents doing "it"

Haha, Yeah sorry it was late when I wrote this.

rhombchick said:
Generally speaking though, I would say just to go by feel.
If it were my spread I would just pull cards until I felt I had enough, but as it is your spread, 'go by feel' means exactly that, go by what you feel is right.
If you feel that rolling a dice is what you need to do then go for it....

Good advice I shall try that, my weakness is that I keep trying to come up with too strict of rules to govern a reading.

Debra said:
It would be helpful to explain your purpose.

You aren't distinguishing people from objects?

So...are you talking about using tarot for some kind of game, or role-playing, rather than for divination and insight? Or some kind of algorithm? Because then you can do whatever.

I don't know of a tarot reader who wouldn't distinguish a person from a thing.

Let's see if I can explain myself a little better.

I am a computer programmer/analyst, being such I see everything as being an object, including people. You nailed it when you mentioned me trying to come up with a game or algorithm, that is what I wanted but for the purposes of insight and divination.

My vision was to separate myself from the reading as a spectator watching a play. The actors would be people and events in my life (even an actor playing myself) and I by interpreting the cards could gain insight on their or my thinking, or a glimpse of what may happen.

It all makes sense in my head though I realize it truly may not make any.

You are right though I do need to differentiate between a thing and a person, I expect that will be done by feel. I do not want to limit this to one or the other I would like to keep it open.

Sheri said:
If you are comparing things, it is possible that the number of cards you would need to pull would vary depending on what you were asking about... for example, you might need 4 cards when comparing an old home to a new one (should I move or stay put) versus 3 for people (what do they bring from their past, what they bring to the relationship now, what will they be like in the future in this relationship, etc.).

I very often use 2 columns to compare things or people (which of these 2 guys should I date) to one another with the same position in each column. Then you can add an additional column that represents what the combination of the 2 would be like. The technique is the same but the important aspects are different.

If you have problems coming up with positions or attributes for what you are comparing, just think of it in terms of questions... what would you want to know about that particular item... that becomes one of the positions, etc.

That is a very good idea, would you first recommend laying a few cards to get a feel for who/what they are describing? Then draw more to represent its attributes?

Thanks All,
Sigmar

Sheri

Sigmar said:
That is a very good idea, would you first recommend laying a few cards to get a feel for who/what they are describing? Then draw more to represent its attributes?

You could do it either way. I would shy away from using "more" cards and try to use as few as possible to avoid confusion.

For example, if you are comparing places to live. Someone wants to know if they should stay where they are versus move to this other place they looked at. You could pull:

Column 1 (current place)......................................Column 2 (new place)
................1..............................................................................2
................3.............................................................................4
................5.............................................................................6

OR

Column 1 (current place)......................................Column 2 (new place)
................1..............................................................................4
................2.............................................................................5
................3.............................................................................6

When you pull the cards, you could assign an attribute to the position that you want to know about... using the second format because it is closer:

#1 What I love about the area (Column 1 or the current place)
#2 What I love about the place (Column 1)
#3 What I would be leaving behind (Column 1)

#4 What I love about the area (Column 2 or the new place)
#5 What I love about the place (Column 2)
#6 What I would be gaining (Column 2)

OR

You could look at cards #1 through #3 and take all the cards into consideration versus cards #4 through #6 without assigning positional meanings and just look and see which grouping "looks" more positive.

What you really need to do is just dive right in and do a bunch of readings using the techniques and see what works and what doesn't. Journal them, do more readings, journal them. Go back and look at how your technique evolved. You might find you do both ways or some sort of combo. Or you might get an idea and decide to try something completely different that you then come back here and share with us all!

Sheri