[AdamJoshua]

Originally Posted by SvilleKid

Smallest round would cause less damage, musch less likely to be lethal unless it hit an organ. Shock less, so more chance to survive a thru-shot, with the 45 seconds you need if hit in the side by the pistol round. It also has a better chance of bouncing off a rib and tearing a big gash in the front and side, but not fatal (but really gory and lots of blood and sewing up needed to repair. Anything that hits an organ, or stays inside the body has a strong chance of death in that era due to lack of antibiotics. Treatment even for surface damage like a hit and glance off a rib.

Accidental misfires more likely with matchlocks anyway. A spark drops from the lit "wick" into the powder pan before gun fired, or the holder brushes up against an edge with the wick and drops a spark off into flashpan. Any numbers of ways these guns could misfire. That small of a round, shock would be heavier for a hit on a strong bone than it would for a soft-tissue thru-and thru. And a glancing blow with lots of surface damage has the potential to bleed heavily, and cause her to pass out after a short time (especially combined with shock).

You probably want to research the muzzle velocity of the gun verses a modern .25 cal. Modern .25 cal isn't usually a killing round for a single shot unless it hits something really vital. And can actually do little damage. I had an appraisal client once that was a former bouncer at a bar. He took 6 shots to the body from a customer, still got to the guy and broke his neck. Granted, he was a big guy. But I also had a teacher in high school that moonlighted as a waiter at a swanky hotel restaurant at night. He got into a gunfight over tips after hours. Both guys had .25's and both took at least six hits at close range. Both eventually died, but was from organ damage, not the size of the rounds. Again, these were more aerodynamic rounds that would be more likely to leave less damage than a round shot.

To get heavy damage without death (in that era), you might need to consider a gun with a heavier caliber round. Don't know if that's workable in the story. But I'd say the smallest round would need some creative liberties due to smaller size. as for a ricochet, if it tore ball into a jagged projectile, more surface damage possible, but you'd lose velocity, less impact shock. BUT.... Medical shock probably kills more people than actual injuries. And effects of shock not really understood and classified (as we know it today) until the last 50 years or so. Medical shock requires fast treatment to avoid death and that treatment wasn't known in the era of your setting. BUY, you could easily work the modern treatment methods into story, done by pure happenstance (or common sense). The delay in treatment for the 30-45 minutes could be almost fatal, and result in a long recovery and near death consequences. I think a gory surface wound, with the followup shock factor is the closer to actual truth. Lack of modern medicine and surgery methods just works against shots that hit the torso and the organs involved and the victim still survive.

This is actually what I was thinking, less of a high caliber pistol more of one of the old single or dual fire small concealable pistols, two fast shots from close range, one in and maybe one that hits a bone, you could make it more interesting by having one of the rounds close to the spine, too close to remove, the embedded shot could add an element later in the story as well, "an old injury".