RE2:Moto Chagatai xp4 and Unwavering Assault

If my Chagatai xp4 has already been in Battle Resolution this turn, and if in the current battlefield I have no army, can I use Unwavering Assault to unbow Chagatai's unit in home and then use his battle ability and move him to the current battlefield?

Chagatai Battle: Even if Chagatai is bowed or has been in a battle resolution this turn: Move him to the current battlefield. If he is now opposed, straighten him.

Unwavering Assault Battle: Target a Samurai Personality in your home. Straighten his unit. Move him to the current battlefield.

I would like to ask for a little clarification on the specific situation from this question http://www.alderac.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=64208

Is it even legal to target any personality who has already been in a battle resolution as the attacker with Unwavering Assault (or any other move in action)? The rulebook specifically states that they cannot move in, and this is not negation (Likewise, the phrases “cannot” or “can only” appearing in rules text apply to the legality of doing something in the first place; they do not imply that doing that thing is merely negated.) [url]http://www.alderac.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=59651&p=767162 [/url] From the comprehensive rules (Battles): The Blind Cards rule means that even if the movement is known beforehand to fail due to ongoing negation effects, the action can still be taken.http://rules.l5r.com/Battles

All this would seem to imply that it is not even legal to announce the action in the first place.

Thanks for clarifying.

Sorry but i don't understand why you can't use Unwavering Assault in a personality who already been in an attacking army during battle resolution this attack phase , just to unbow his unit, but you can use rapid deployment in the same case and resolve another effect(movement of the another unit).

In reference to these merged questions about Moto Chagatai xp4 and Unwavering Assault, and to some recent changes to the CR, made on December 21st, about moving a unit that was in an attacking army during a battle’s resolution.

Rules about the Resolution Segment say: "A unit that was in the current attacking army at any point during a battle’s resolution can not move to another battlefield during the same Attack Phase". Mr faulkes clarified the rules: this "can not" wording now means "Actions that would move a unit to a battlefield cannot be legally taken if that unit was in an attacking army during the Resolution Segment of another battle during an attack. This is a restriction on what actions can be taken, not negation of the movement".

Since it is just a restriction on what actions can be taken, does it mean it is NOT a restriction on targets or effects of actions that can legally be taken ?

Here is an example with two questions. My Attack Phase begins. I control two Samurai Personalities Hans and Kurt in my home. I assign Hans to attack. His battle starts and resolves, he returns home. Another battle starts and the Defender passes. I announce Unwavering Assault, which can legally be taken since it isn't an action such as it would move a unit to a battlefield and this unit was in an attacking army during the Resolution Segment of another battle during an attack: indeed I could target Kurt. After this action is legally announced and thus taken, what prevents me from targeting Hans ? Secondly, I really intended to target Kurt to meet the "spirit" of these new rules but my opponent plays Misdirection. What prevents him from targeting Hans, since these rules only apply to taking or not taking an action ?

Thanks for your explanations.

In reference to the last merged question about moving a unit that was in an attacking army during a battle’s resolution.

Dr. Faulkes answered: "your question is based on the notion that 'taken' was being used in its technical timing sense for reactions. It was being used in the more general sense of 'can't even try it'."

My questions were based on the notion that 'taken' = 'attempted' = 'announced' = 'tried'. I don't understand what is "its technical timing sense for reactions" in the rules about Timing but I suppose it doesn't really matter here... Also I still don't understand whether Misdirection can make a legally attempted Unwavering Assault suddenly target a unit that was in an attacking army during the Resolution Segment of another battle during this Attack Phase, because Dr. Faulkes' new rules don't seem to affect targeting after an action is legally attempted. May you tell us more about this, please ?

Thanks for your time and your patience.