Counterspelled Booming Blade

[Psyren]

If that were the case, the Spelljammer rule you mentioned is superfluous.

Sure, but it's useful to spell out anyway, especially since it works differently in 5e Spelljammer than in prior editions and 5e has the goal of bringing some of those legacy players back. Rules text being superfluous/redundant isn't a crime.

But then it's also silent on a lot of different things in different environments. How to adjudicate those different interactions is left up to the DM, and it is false to say that a DM that does not allow Wall of Fire to work in water is "not following RAW", while the one who does allow it "is following RAW".

Good thing I never said that then? Who are you arguing with here?

And Tidal Wave specifically extinguishes unprotected flames, so that's what I'd go with. Is the difference because Lesser Restoration affects a condition defined by the rules of the game, while Tidal Wave doesn't?

I mean there's all kinds of justifications a DM can use for treating them differently, such as the individual DM's definition of "unprotected flames", to the use of "ends" vs "extinguishes", to the discharge nature of Blinding Smite vs Wall of Fire's more continuous effect, and so on. Again though, nobody is saying you're wrong for Tidal Wave removing the effect for the remainder of the spell's duration, just that we are ruling differently.