[Nycidian Grey]

Honestly haven't played shadowrun in a while getting back to it if if +5 is a hit then that's cool doesn't significantly alter my example. I think though I'll redo it using average of 1/3 being hits so I don't have redo all the damn rolls.

*edit: Changed to be accurate to the rules, looks like setup needs to be against vehicle levels of armor and body before it is even competitive.

[UmaroVI]

Not really related to the Set-up, but in that sort of situation what you should be doing is using your Free Action to make a Called Shot for -4 to hit and +4 DV on your first shot, since you have a huge pile of dice to hit over a relatively small dodge pool. Also, Stick-n-Shock is very helpful against extremely-high-armor people. Lastly, don't forget the "getting shot at multiple times" -1 penalty to dodge each successive shot, also wound penalties to dodge.

A similar but less bad "manuever" relies on having a decently high initiate grade. Free Action to use Adept Centering, Simple Action (since you only get one Free Action) to Call Shot to ignore armor, Simple Action to shoot.

[Tsuzua]

Alright helps if i know the rules. It looks like until armor and body gets past these levels setup is useless Mathematically. It still could be better but guessing you would need to be against around 35-40 total armor + body before setup is useful. To bad I like the concept

*Edited to fix math again

It's actually a little bit worse than that.  Since it's an attack test, the ork in the example would roll defenses* against the setup.  He'll average 2 hits.  That means that the setup will give a +6 bonus instead of +8.  Now the ork will lose a die on the second defense test, but the net result is 29 dice to the ork's 5.  That's a 24 dice advantage or 8 net hits on average.  So the damage is 8 total DV of damage in one phase with setup.

*-The use of net hits also implies there's an opposing roll of some sort. 

[Leticron]

Actually, an adjective is simply a word used to describe a word, and most nouns can become adjectives the same way verbs can become adverbs. Unless something is hypenated (double-click), or a compound word (rainbow) it is always an adjective + a noun.

In this case we have "weapon". What kind of weapon? A "_melee_ weapon". Same thing as saying you have a "car". What kind of car? A "_red_ car".

That's exactly my point. Almost all nouns are, but melee seems not to be. I even looked it up, though only on the internet, I don't have my big dictionary available right now.
Cheese salad would be the same kind of wording with cheesy being the adjective.
Anyway... it wasn't my intention (yet my fault) to get caught in such a discussion so before it gets out of hand I'll leave it at that.

Besides, there are at least two weapons (the Jupiter Shockclub and the Defiance EX Shocker) that state they're equipped to be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon, and can be used as either without having to "improvise" with them. Makes very little sense to me that you'd lose your ability to defend yourself with the stunner in your off-hand just because you pulled the trigger on the other one.

I think the act of aiming and actually hitting something with a gun differs greatly from its usage as a club. The Defiance EX Shocker, might be a different kind, as its contacts point the same direction as its "barrel", but then again it does exactly the same damage in melee range, as it is a contact weapon.
Well, as I mentioned above, I'll stop derailing this thread.

[Nycidian Grey]

It's actually a little bit worse than that.  Since it's an attack test, the ork in the example would roll defenses* against the setup. 

I originally assumed that but if you look at the "Ranged Combat Summary" table in the main book the attack test and the defense test are very specifically two different parts of ranged combat one would think that if they wanted the defenders to get defense dice then it would say the attack test minus the defense test, not the net successes of attack test. Also considering how bad it already is making it worse doesn't seem rational not that it matters since its obviously not useful to use.

[Nycidian Grey]

I think the act of aiming and actually hitting something with a gun differs greatly from its usage as a club. The Defiance EX Shocker, might be a different kind, as its contacts point the same direction as its "barrel", but then again it does exactly the same damage in melee range, as it is a contact weapon.

Your right there is a big difference between shooting a gun and using a melee weapon, in that using a gun is easier than using a melee weapon or unarmed combat, this is patently obvious even by the game mechanics in where shooting all but fully automatic is a simple action yet melee is a complex action.

So if were going by logic, does it make sense that I can fully defend with my offhand, if my main hand is doing a complex action(melee). However, the moment I use a simple action with my main hand(pistol) it makes it so I no longer can concentrate enough to defend with my offhand?

[Tsuzua]

I originally assumed that but if you look at the "Ranged Combat Summary" table in the main book the attack test and the defense test are very specifically two different parts of ranged combat one would think that if they wanted the defenders to get defense dice then it would say the attack test minus the defense test, not the net successes of attack test. Also considering how bad it already is making it worse doesn't seem rational not that it matters since its obviously not useful to use.

I was looking at how the combat sequence has the attacker and defender roll off each other in an opposed test (SR4A 149).  And the line from the same page, "Combat is handled as an Opposed Test between the attacker and defender."  There's also the mention of net hits under Setup which is typically used in the context of opposed tests.

As for kicking an already weak maneuver when it's down, that's par de course of Shadowrun.  Typically stuff that already is weak gets even worse when everything is taken into consideration such as pure adepts, longarms, and cybercombat.

[Leticron]

I think the act of aiming and actually hitting something with a gun differs greatly from its usage as a club. The Defiance EX Shocker, might be a different kind, as its contacts point the same direction as its "barrel", but then again it does exactly the same damage in melee range, as it is a contact weapon.

Your right there is a big difference between shooting a gun and using a melee weapon, in that using a gun is easier than using a melee weapon or unarmed combat, this is patently obvious even by the game mechanics in where shooting all but fully automatic is a simple action yet melee is a complex action.

So if were going by logic, does it make sense that I can fully defend with my offhand, if my main hand is doing a complex action(melee). However, the moment I use a simple action with my main hand(pistol) it makes it so I no longer can concentrate enough to defend with my offhand?

First of all, I think this particular rule is stated the way it is to keep it in check. As much as we like to see role play games as a set of rules that tries to simulate reality, it is also a set of rules in which its creators try to give its players a good gaming experience. That includes - nowadays probably more than 20 years ago - balancing things out. Once something is too good, everyone wants it and once everyone has it, it's nothing special anymore. So I'm not sure the realism argument does any good in role play games. Most likely your interpretation will simply get ruled out in favor of game balance. My point was about how clear the wording actually is, which is a different point.

As I said I don't necessarily want to go on with that argument - as your group is better of playing in a way that is comfortable for you.
Should you however absolutely want to discuss that further (it is your thread after all), let me know.