Counterspelled Booming Blade

[diplomancer]

Mostly because lesser restoration doesn't have the caveat about "unprotected" blindness. It just removes it, period. Wall of Fire is protected by the spell.

Just to be clear: You are saying that if Tidal Waves did not have the "unprotected" clause, you would rule that it extinguishes Wall of Fire? In that case, our difference is really only about what the meaning of what "unprotected flame" is, though I must say your meaning is, in my opinion, not what regular English would mean by "unprotected flame".

It would also contradict what you've said on this post:

Yall are giving me a headache. We know WoF doesn't act like mundane fire because the spell tells us all the ways it doesn't: only hot on one side, doesn't spread, and it exists in that spot for one minute or until the caster's concentration drops, whichever comes first. Period, full stop, do not pass go, that wall of fire is there until the spell ends, and nothing interacts with that except Dispel Magic, which can end the spell prematurely, or antimagic field, which suppresses the spell until the field goes away. Tidal Wave doesn't end the spell, ergo the wall of fire is still there.

All it takes for this post to be false is for there to be an effect that douses flames, without the caveat of "unprotected flame". Say, if there is an adventure where there is a dam and the text of the adventure says "if the dam is broken, it floods such and such an area, extinguishing all flames in it". Or if they write a spell that douses flames, even if it doesn't reference Wall of Fire.

The most important takeaway: spells (or other events in the game) can extinguish the effects of other spells without specifically being referenced to in either spell text. This is how the game is supposed to work. All spells or features come out with the clause rebus sic standibus.