[Inconnu]

Who said that the 2 attacks have to be against seperate targets? I've had a great deal of success dual wielding stun batons and hitting the same dude 2 times. Read:Instant KO.

[Glyph]

Strictly by RAW, not possible.  You can split your dice pool to attack multiple targets, but there is nothing about attacking the same target multiple times.  Normal melee combat actually assumes that as the norm: "Rather than a single blow, each attack is a series of moves and counter-moves executed by those involved." (SR4, pg. 146)

That said, allowing someone to split their dice pool to attack the same target twice (essentially sacrificing accuracy for speed) would not be an unbalancing or unreasonable house rule.

[Inconnu]

Two hands, two stun batons. 

[Glyph]

Strictly by RAW, not possible.

I was wrong there.  Nothing for it in the main book, but Arsenal pg. 163 has rules for using two weapons.

[Redmercury]

Are there rules for improvising shields? Out of fallen foes? I imagine that would be extremely useful for a melee fighter. Roll-wise and Role-wise.

[Mirikon]

That would count as cover.

[Redmercury]

Nothin' like a gnome shield. High body and low weight. On this note though, why don't shields just add cover rather than armor? or are there rules for this?

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Because even the best shields can be shot through with a large-enough caliber weapon.  Cover typically can't.

[Inconnu]

Unless of course it can I believe there were rules for material and dv and stuff.

[Redmercury]

There are, I'm saying why not just give the shield a structure rating and make it give cover? Well, the obvious answer would be because people would max out their armor and then take a shield. Of course this wouldn't be a huge problem if you just gave an inherent action penalty to holding a shield do to how cumbersome it is.

[Mithlas]

Makes sense to me. I know science fiction and various military exercise simulations have already started using what would more accurately be termed "mobile cover" than shields, but the reason they've never seen adoption so far despite the idea being 20-something years old is that it hampers mobility too much and it's more important to be able to run and gun than hunker down and withstand. I'd just give it a modifier due to being cumbersome and call it a day.