Talk: Content Revision/@comment-32710969-20200330224241/@comment-32710969-20200331000929

Latest revision as of 00:09, 31 March 2020

HeadlessKramerGeoff777 wrote:
Do we have evidence that Flowey was 2-B at the time?

Not really but its safe to say sans has at least fought flowey couple of times off screen cause flowey says "fair share of resets"

Revision as of 00:09, 31 March 2020 (view source) Sans2345 (Message Wall \| contribs) (Created page with "<div class="quote">HeadlessKramerGeoff777 wrote:<br />Do we have evidence that Flowey was 2-B at the time?</div> Not really but its safe to say sans has at least fought flowey...")		Latest revision as of 00:09, 31 March 2020 (view source) Sans2345 (Message Wall \| contribs) No edit summary
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<div class="quote">HeadlessKramerGeoff777 wrote:<br />Do we have evidence that Flowey was 2-B at the time?</div>		<div class="quote">HeadlessKramerGeoff777 wrote:<br />Do we have evidence that Flowey was 2-B at the time?</div>
−	Not really but its safe to say sans has at least fought flowey couple of times of screen cause flowey says "fair share of resets"	+	Not really but its safe to say sans has at least fought flowey couple of times off screen cause flowey says "fair share of resets"