User blog comment:Edin the White Mage/Counterattack No Longer Compulsory/@comment-10483040-20160605051524/@comment-26290163-20160605202432

That's par for the course. The Japanese detailed rules also have the "Choose" and not "you may choose" in their description of the keyword COUNTERATTACK. However, I have also had contact with Bushiroad steadily for a very long time and they've changed text after correspondence.

What is the professional rule checker's affiliation with Bushiroad? I'm actually not clear on what a professional rule checker is, whether they have access that others don't to inside information, etc... I remember learning quite a bit a while ago from Tim Power Gamer, who has now deleted the ruling. He posted errors in emails. Fortunately, I was able to learn from my miscalculation, see that he was correct in his assessment of auto abilities in a battle Play Timing, and when I asked my contact about it, they not only backed up Tim's assessment, but provided me a new term that made the limitations of the Battle Play Timing make sense.

While I'm unsure of what a professional rule checker is, or if the person you're referring to does this for a living, and that's what "professional" means, I go with my contact at Bushiroad as whenever I've showed inconsistencies, like with the emails, and I also added your point about "Choose" and "You may choose", they own up when something has been mishandled by Support.

There is a problem with any route someone chooses to go. If you go by the detailed rules, you'll be wrong sometimes, as has been shown with great lapses. If you go with an email from support at Bushiroad, they've been wrong. I can't speak to the professional rule checker, but if they are simply checking rules published by Bushiroad or from contact with support, they will also be wrong at times. And all of the aforementioned ways of obtaining knowledge about rulings will also be right.

This presents an interesting situation. A Wiki about Buddyfight where multiple people can edit sections. It's not officially sanctioned by Bushiroad, so who decides what is ultimately best for the community? Going back and adding the ruling back in could provoke someone else to take it out. It just becomes a place where some believe this and some believe that.

I'm not about to get Edin involved in something like that. It is my opinion, though, that in situations like this, the differing viewpoints should both be on the page so that the community knows there are differing views. I don't know how else to do it, unless you simply go by an admin. But then, you're basically saying that even an official from Bushiroad, the professional rule checker who can't post here, or someone who just joined, but may know more than anyone else about it, don't have a voice.

I do believe Bushiroad is getting better at straightening things out, though. The first time I pointed out a major flaw in their detailed rules that allowed turn player's to use the [Act] ability in any phase because of the incorrect wording they used, back in year one, took a very long time to correct in an update. Even though they noted the error before the NY Regionals and said that the problem had been sent to the correct department to be fixed, it wasn't fixed until after the Finals.

However, when they released the latest Version of the Detailed Rules, I pointed out a problem in the text and it was fixed in days.

Anyway, I certainly won't be editing COUNTERATTACK as it seems that it would simply start a nasty back and forth where the losers are the rest of the community. However, people must realize that not everyone has Edin's temperament where they don't care if someone changes something they've posted.

Anyone, it seems, can go in without explanation and take down someone else's work. I know from experience how annoying that can be. Especially when no explanation has been given and there is more than one opinion about the matter. Ultimately, I think people want to see whatever the correct ruling is on a matter. But when you have sources that disagree, as I stated before, I believe viewpoints and their respective reasons and sources for having them should be displayed so that each community member can decide how to respond.

Yikes. Long reply as always. Take it easy. I have no idea how long it will be until my source gets back to me. The last time they had to consult the Japanese Dev Dept, it took two weeks.

And, of course, regardless of what my source says, there are bound to still be disagreements. If we all thought the same, it'd be a boring world.