Still don't get why Saturn is not the significator.
https://www.astrologyweekly.com/dictionary/significator.php
"A planet may be taken as a significator of a person or of an event, or of affairs ruled by a House. Its strength by virtue of its Sign and House position and its relationship by aspects are then consulted in arriving at a judgment concerning a desired condition.
In general the strongest planet in the Figure, usually the ruler of the Ascendant, is taken as the Significator of the native."
" The Sun and Midheaven are by some authorities deemed to have affinity as Significators of the honor, credit, and standing of the subject of the Figure, or of the surviving male head of the family; the Moon and Ascendant to have affinity as Significators of the personal fortunes…Jupiter, of wealth and increase;
and Saturn, of disease, loss, death and decay. In this use there is danger of confusing the distinction between a Significator, as representing persons in Horary Astrology, and Promittors as representative of things promised or desired;
but every planet in the Figure can be taken not only as the significator of something, but also as the Promittor of something."
Agree theoretically to the rules of Traditional Astrology. We are very probably limited by our physical realities.
Yet both Tarot and Psychics yields answers that cannot be verified. Some are just felt internally as true or untrue. I think only in experimentation and pushing the rules and the potentially controversial, can we arrive in new conclusions and discoveries.