It ' s literally in his papers <| sep |> I hear what you ' re saying , and do feel that using the mechanic in that way could possible lead to more interesting decisions . Still , in order for that to be a real consideration , there ' d have to be Rogue cards that benefit from being played first . That way there ' d be an opportunity cost to playing Gadgetzan Ferryman at the beginning of a combo turn , as you ' d have to weigh not bouncing against the If played first effect of the other cards . As it stands , the question isn ' t much more complex than Do I want to bounce a card or not , which isn ' t in my opinion fundamentally more interesting game design than remembering to play Youthful Brewmaster first onto an empty board . Sequencing is not a particularly interesting consideration in most cases , as it ' s a matter of knowing the ' correct ' order rather than choosing the best available order from a series of possible orders . Remembering to play Ice Lance after Frostbolt isn ' t an interesting consideration remembering to play Gadgetzan Ferryman first isn ' t really different than remembering to play Backstab before Eviscerate . There are a few exceptions , though , like leaving Edwin as a 66 when you suspect that your opponent is holding BGH . But even allowing that situationally desirable combo effects can lead to interesting gameplay decisions , I find Gadgetzan Ferryman a little perturbing . Rogue is wellpositioned to have as much viable deck diversity as Warriorsat various points in Hearthstone ' s history , they ' ve had great controlcombooriented decks , good face minionbased decks , good tempooriented midrange decks , good valueoriented midrange decks , good valueoriented control decks . Very rarely have any of these decks been good enough , but I feel like Rogues only need a little push to get them to that point . One or two good cards to help control Rogues trade with their face in the early game and survive into the late game , or one or two good cards to help tempomidrange Rogues stick on the board a little better against classes that can clear efficiently . I don ' t agree with a lot of this community that Rogues need board clearI like when classes have areas of total inability , I think it makes the game interesting . I also think Hearthstone is at its most fun when AoEs are rare . But I do think Rogues need something inventive , strong , and tailored to the weak points that have kept most of their decks from being good enough , and seeing a plainlystatted minion with an uninventive and underpowered effect instead is disheartening . I mean , maybe it ' ll be good . No one can really know until it ' s out , and I don ' t think it ' s good to be alarmist about cards before they ' ve been released . But it ' s unexciting , and that stings enough .