Decision spread

The decision spread exists because "should I do A or B" is not a question a single column of cards answers well. Asking about one option makes the reading about that option; the alternative quietly stays unexamined. Two parallel branches keep both in view.

Structure: six cards in two columns of three.

• A · Now — the situation as it stands if you take path A.
• A · Process — what path A asks of you while it unfolds.
• A · Outcome — where path A lands.
• B · Now / B · Process / B · Outcome — the same three for path B.

Read down each column first, separately, then compare row by row. The row comparison is where most of the value is: if A · Process is a card of exhaustion and B · Process is a card of slow progress, the reading is describing the cost of each path, not predicting which one succeeds.

What this spread deliberately does not do is declare a winner. Two branches can both read as workable, which is a real result — it means the decision is about preference rather than risk, and no amount of cards will settle a preference. It can also show that both branches carry the same obstacle, which usually means the obstacle is not in the choice at all.

A practical note: write the question so both options are named explicitly before drawing. "A" and "B" left abstract will produce two columns you cannot tell apart afterwards.