Atalics

Everything i've done so far, I have always tried to be fair.
Obviously we have different ideas of what is fair.

So for those not in the know the issue, here was the problem.

Haakoi used Silent Strike, which disguises itself as another move, "misses" and replaces the damage with fake heals.
The issue was that MasterBlade has a Scanner feature, which tells you the percentage HP of a target pokemon.

In my eyes, fake heals should make the opponent have taken damage, but not even feel like they did- as if they hadn't even been hit. And since the move was originally designed in a game, this would translate into the trainer seeing no change in the HP bar.

Thus the move should have pretty much the same effect in table top- any attempt to determine the HP would result in whatever the current plus fake heals and fake damage would be. But apparently the scanner is supposed to work 100% of the time without fail. The manual has nothing about fake heals and fake damage, because they don't exist in the mainstream games, but when i made them the entire point of them is to disguise the actual amount of HP.

Now your reasoning was that Alex took that Scanner feat, and allowed him to see HP% without fail forever.

I merely interpreted it as Alex took the Scanner feat, which allows him to check out the HP of his opponents, which is a high advantage over everyone else already.

This situation was compared to having something that overrode Voltorb Flip, which blocks mind readers.

The difference in my eyes was that....
Voltorb switch will be used, like, maybe 20 times at most?
Whereas Scanner will be used, like, i dunno, 2000?

I mean it would be pretty mean for me to reduce those 20 voltorb switches to 19 by some OP mindpierce thing,
but I don't really see the problem of 1990 Scanner uses versus 2000.

In the original language of the Scanner, I don't have my internet on so I have to rely on memory, there was no explicit statement that it cannot fail. Of course, one must keep in mind that the creators never thought there would be a reason that it might fail. Now it becomes like those legislators trying to determine how centuries old laws apply to modern world- there are different interpretations of how it applies in this new situation.

The creators did not think that Scanner would ever be subverted- which you believe implies that it can't be subverted.

The creators did not think that Scanner would ever be subverted-
I think if the creators thought that something would subvert Scanner, they would have made some sort of mention that when this situation occurs, then Scanner would fail.

However, an exact opposite assumption could also be made:
If the creators thought about fake heals, they would decide that Scanner would be able to pierce that.

I don't know which one would happen, but I'm assuming the first guess, because I think it is fair. it's still a great feat, you still get 1990 uses...

Should the interface piece be immune to screwiness if an entire feature point was spent on it and it's part of character growth?

Should the specialized interface screw attack be able to interface screw a piece of an interface that still remains incredibly viable and useful?
How powerful is a feature vs a move? I think a feature is more powerful, but this feature is already powerful enough without gaining immunity to fake heals and fake damage.

So the real question is: How powerful is a feature? Is it as powerful as you think it is? Is it as powerful as I think it is?
That's a tough question to answer, as it changes for every feat, so we can't really use other feats as comparison to this one- if you can find one similar enough to Scanner for use in your argument or you come up with other reasons, then I will reconsider.

(Voltorb Flip is specific immunity to mind reading. But we don't know if Scanner would be specific immunity to fake heals and fake damage, all we know is that it tells you health of some sort. It's not a good comparison to make at all.)

In the meantime, my answer is still no, because I think it's fair.

I really hope this doesn't happen again, but it probably will.

TL;DR:
I use the rulebook as a guideline. I follow it as closely as possible, but I have to make exceptions when it's unclear or unfair. I have to use my own interpretations as to what the revised rules would be, and I do so based on what I think is fair and balanced.