Wimples's page

We've already stated that that specific interpretation is probably what paizo intended, as I already mentioned earlier; it's the same conclusion Hendelbolaf and I came to. What I asked was is if there was any reason to totally rule out different types of hp-based bleed, as the prd doesn't really indicate otherwise.

That's generally how I ruled it, but it is what it is; a personal override on pretty nondescript rules. Any other thoughts? The main problem is that the PRD doesn't really specify what a "kind of damage" is. It may be intuitive to assume they meant just other bleeds like ability damage, but one could easily argue otherwise since bleed is so vague.

Bleed Rules:
A creature that is taking bleed damage takes the listed amount of damage at the beginning of its turn.
Bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 heal check or through the application of any spell that cures hit point damage (even if the bleed is ability damage). Some bleed effects cause ability damage or even ability drain.
Bleed effects do not stack with each other unless they deal different kinds of damage. When two or more bleed effects deal the same kind of damage, take the worse effect. In this case, ability drain is worse than ability damage.

It's a little vague, but does this refer to ANY type of damage, such as slashing or piercing, or does it refer to bleed types such as HP, STR, CON, etc.

For example, my character uses two obsidian daggers to deal damage to an opponent, then breaks them with Splintering Weapon to cause bleed damage. As long as one dagger did damage with slashing and one with piercing, I'm pretty certain that the wording allows for a total of 2d4 bleed after both have connected (The same is true if they both did the same type of damage), but would the bleed per round total to 2d4 if one dagger did piercing and the other slashing?