On Movement question 1, your answer is incorrect. While you may choose when to take a bonus action on your turn, you cannot use a bonus action to interrupt an action, which teleporting between attacks would be, as extra attack grants an extra attack, not an attack action. You can however use your normal movement(s) between attacks.
On Movement Question 17, I would make the Argument it is clear. The Echo Knight is immune to conditions including grappled, and therefore cannot be held, and has already been said not to be able to hold things.
On Movement question 1, your answer is incorrect. While you may choose when to take a bonus action on your turn, you cannot use a bonus action to interrupt an action, which teleporting between attacks would be, as extra attack grants an extra attack, not an attack action. You can however use your normal movement(s) between attacks.
On Movement Question 17, I would make the Argument it is clear. The Echo Knight is immune to conditions including grappled, and therefore cannot be held, and has already been said not to be able to hold things.
Incorrect, on both counts.
So long as the bonus action is not dependent on a trigger, it can be invoked whenever. If an Eldritch Knight wanted to use misty step between two attacks, due to their Extra Attack feature, they could. It's a perfectly legal move. The only restriction on teleporting via Manifest Echo is how much movement the Echo Knight has remaining. So long as they have at least 15 feet of unspent movement, they can teleport.
The Echo Knight is not immune to the grappled condition. They are a creature, and as such they meet all the requirements. Their echo, however, is immune to all conditions, so this may just be a mix-up of terminology. That said, there's nothing expressed in the feature that says the echo cannot hold things. That is an inference based on the interactions of other rules. The current assumption of this thread is that the Echo Knight can initiate a grapple but cannot maintain it because they do not stay within the reach of their target. But any DM can rule differently at their own table. What matters is they are consistent in their application of the rules.
On Movement question 1, your answer is incorrect. While you may choose when to take a bonus action on your turn, you cannot use a bonus action to interrupt an action, which teleporting between attacks would be, as extra attack grants an extra attack, not an attack action. You can however use your normal movement(s) between attacks.
On Movement Question 17, I would make the Argument it is clear. The Echo Knight is immune to conditions including grappled, and therefore cannot be held, and has already been said not to be able to hold things.
Incorrect, on both counts.
So long as the bonus action is not dependent on a trigger, it can be invoked whenever. If an Eldritch Knight wanted to use misty step between two attacks, due to their Extra Attack feature, they could. It's a perfectly legal move. The only restriction on teleporting via Manifest Echo is how much movement the Echo Knight has remaining. So long as they have at least 15 feet of unspent movement, they can teleport.
The Echo Knight is not immune to the grappled condition. They are a creature, and as such they meet all the requirements. Their echo, however, is immune to all conditions, so this may just be a mix-up of terminology. That said, there's nothing expressed in the feature that says the echo cannot hold things. That is an inference based on the interactions of other rules. The current assumption of this thread is that the Echo Knight can initiate a grapple but cannot maintain it because they do not stay within the reach of their target. But any DM can rule differently at their own table. What matters is they are consistent in their application of the rules.
1. Agree on the first paragraph.
2. Agree with the second paragraph, with some reservations. Yes, a DM can rule anything they want. To rule the the Echo can maintain a grapple would be changing the rules though. More to the point, there is nothing that says the Echo can hold things. The Echo is an object. It can't maintain a grappled condition. The Echo Knight would have to be within reach of the target, to maintain the grapple imo. It is NOT the Echo's attack, but the EK's attack being done through the Echo's location.
2. Agree with the second paragraph, with some reservations. Yes, a DM can rule anything they want. To rule the the Echo can maintain a grapple would be changing the rules though. More to the point, there is nothing that says the Echo can hold things. The Echo is an object. It can't maintain a grappled condition. The Echo Knight would have to be within reach of the target, to maintain the grapple imo. It is NOT the Echo's attack, but the EK's attack being done through the Echo's location.
It's a weird interaction, to be sure, and I'm not convinced the grapple automatically ends. The fighter can make attacks through their echo, including Opportunity Attacks, and Grappling is a special attack they can make. So, RAW, they can initiate a grapple through their echo. And the grappled condition specifies how it ends. Technically, the target never leaves the fighter's reach because the fighter's reach includes the echo and its adjacent spaces.
Truthfully, I'm not sure it matters if the echo is what is grappling the target or if the fighter is. Effects can grapple targets, too. It would be weird to allow one and not the other. If the fighter cannot maintain the grapple through their echo, there would be no point to allowing the grapple attempt in the first place. And yet, they can still initiate the grapple. So logically there must be a payoff.
I'll be the first person in line to say there are some issues with the echo knight's features. I'm just not sure this is one of them.
2. Agree with the second paragraph, with some reservations. Yes, a DM can rule anything they want. To rule the the Echo can maintain a grapple would be changing the rules though. More to the point, there is nothing that says the Echo can hold things. The Echo is an object. It can't maintain a grappled condition. The Echo Knight would have to be within reach of the target, to maintain the grapple imo. It is NOT the Echo's attack, but the EK's attack being done through the Echo's location.
It's a weird interaction, to be sure, and I'm not convinced the grapple automatically ends. The fighter can make attacks through their echo, including Opportunity Attacks, and Grappling is a special attack they can make. So, RAW, they can initiate a grapple through their echo. And the grappled condition specifies how it ends. Technically, the target never leaves the fighter's reach because the fighter's reach includes the echo and its adjacent spaces.
Truthfully, I'm not sure it matters if the echo is what is grappling the target or if the fighter is. Effects can grapple targets, too. It would be weird to allow one and not the other. If the fighter cannot maintain the grapple through their echo, there would be no point to allowing the grapple attempt in the first place. And yet, they can still initiate the grapple. So logically there must be a payoff.
I'll be the first person in line to say there are some issues with the echo knight's features. I'm just not sure this is one of them.
Except making an attack from the echo's space is not the same as extending your reach to the echo's space. You can make the grapple sure, but you're still not *there* at the end of the turn, so the grapple ends. unless you teleport to swap places with the echo to maintain the grapple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
If a Knight is allowed to grapple through an Echo, what abuses might arise, or how might this impact the power level of the Subclass?
with minimal investment, you can suddenly grapple four enemies at once. Grapples only take one hand, so the normal person can grapple two things. Echo knights, without any special race investments, can suddenly grapple four, at least 30 feet apart. If it's a Simic Hybrid with the Grappling Appendages, that's eight things within 30 feet being grappled, all of which can then eventually be shoved prone and held down.
that's quite a bit of power.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
If a Knight is allowed to grapple through an Echo, what abuses might arise, or how might this impact the power level of the Subclass?
with minimal investment, you can suddenly grapple four enemies at once. Grapples only take one hand, so the normal person can grapple two things. Echo knights, without any special race investments, can suddenly grapple four, at least 30 feet apart. If it's a Simic Hybrid with the Grappling Appendages, that's eight things within 30 feet being grappled, all of which can then eventually be shoved prone and held down.
that's quite a bit of power.
But can they really?
The echo isn't grappling the target. It's an object; it literally can't. The echo knight is. The issue is what constitutes a creature's reach. Reach is ill-defined, and what little we have can best be described as a general rule. What we do know is when the echo knight takes the Attack action or makes an Opportunity Attack, the attack may originate from the echo's space. But does that expand their reach? Yes and no. Their reach, if we can quantify it, doesn't expand out from the echo knight's space. But we do have another space from which their reach can originate. And so long as that echo remains active, that duplication of reach remains in effect. It's not explicit, but it is implied.
If the argument is that an echo knight's reach can only extend from the echo knight themself, then they cannot grapple via their echo because the target must be within their reach. But this also ignores how the echo knight can attack through their echo and utilize the attack's full reach in doing so. And their ability to grapple is still limited by the number of hands the echo knight has available. Because, again, the echo isn't able to grapple. It's merely expanding the number of squares on a grid that would fall within the echo knight's reach. The echo knight still needs to be the one grappling the target.
I can see this going either way, and I think that debate is healthy. Ultimately, it's up to the DM to decide. All we can do here is provide thorough rationale.
If a Knight is allowed to grapple through an Echo, what abuses might arise, or how might this impact the power level of the Subclass?
with minimal investment, you can suddenly grapple four enemies at once. Grapples only take one hand, so the normal person can grapple two things. Echo knights, without any special race investments, can suddenly grapple four, at least 30 feet apart. If it's a Simic Hybrid with the Grappling Appendages, that's eight things within 30 feet being grappled, all of which can then eventually be shoved prone and held down.
that's quite a bit of power.
But can they really?
The echo isn't grappling the target. It's an object; it literally can't. The echo knight is. The issue is what constitutes a creature's reach. Reach is ill-defined, and what little we have can best be described as a general rule. What we do know is when the echo knight takes the Attack action or makes an Opportunity Attack, the attack may originate from the echo's space. But does that expand their reach? Yes and no. Their reach, if we can quantify it, doesn't expand out from the echo knight's space. But we do have another space from which their reach can originate. And so long as that echo remains active, that duplication of reach remains in effect. It's not explicit, but it is implied.
If the argument is that an echo knight's reach can only extend from the echo knight themself, then they cannot grapple via their echo because the target must be within their reach. But this also ignores how the echo knight can attack through their echo and utilize the attack's full reach in doing so. And their ability to grapple is still limited by the number of hands the echo knight has available. Because, again, the echo isn't able to grapple. It's merely expanding the number of squares on a grid that would fall within the echo knight's reach. The echo knight still needs to be the one grappling the target.
I can see this going either way, and I think that debate is healthy. Ultimately, it's up to the DM to decide. All we can do here is provide thorough rationale.
For the time span of that attack, your reach is extended so that you can attack from the Echo's location. You have to be in constant contact with the grappled target to maintain a grapple. There is nothing in the EK that indicates that when you are attacking from the Echo's position, that you are constantly in that Echo's space. You can attack from the Echo's location, even though you are in a different location...that's all it says you can do. Your reach is the Echo's space, for the time of the attack. Once the attack is over, your reach is your own space again.
That's one way to interpret the rules, yes. What matters most is consistency. Either the target is within their reach or they're not. The feature is mum on whether or not reach is extended and for how long if it is. So, as with most things, it's up to the DM to adjudicate.
You've made your position known. I'm pointing out that there's another valid interpretation.
Q: Can an Echo and Knight swap places between attacks? A: Yes, the rules for bonus actions state that they can happen anytime during your turn.
Bonus Actions says, “… You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action."
(minor clarification - 4/9/21) Q: Can an Echo ‘fly’ or move in any direction? A: Yes. There is nothing in the rules or the description of the Echo's movement that would prevent it from moving in the z axis (up/down). Per the Echo Knight rules: "...you can mentally command the echo to move up to 30 feet in any direction...". This is very similar to how spells like Bigby's Hand or Spiritual Weapon work, except the require a bonus action. Reference: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/04/02/is-bigbys-hand-actually-flying-e-g-is-its-movement-speed-flying-speed/
Q: If an echo knight has a flight speed, does that allow the echo to fly as well, or would the echo fall at the end of every turn? A: No. Echos do not have a speed, and the Knight moves them.
Per Jeremy Crawford, "The echo created by an Echo Knight doesn't have a speed, and the knight can move the echo in any direction, including into the air. The echo can hang out wherever you move it."
Q: Is an Echo affected by difficult terrain? A: No, Echoes don't have a speed, so difficult terrain doesn't affect them. (thanks @LeviRocks)
Q: Can an Echo move more than 30’ from the Knight without it disappearing? A: Yes. However if the Echo moves more than 30’ from the Knight at any time, it will disappear at the end of Knight's round. The exception to this rule is the use of the Echo Avatar ability. When using this feature, you can move an Echo more than 30’ away.
Ad 5. Comma placement matters. The rule states " If your echo is ever more than 30 feet from you at the end of your turn, it is destroyed."
The Echo is destroyed only if it is more then 30 feet from you at the end of your turn.
Example 1*: - At the start of your turn, your Echo is 30 feet from you - You command it to go 15 feet away from you (to the enemy) - You make your attacks from Echos space - You command it to go back to you 15 feet - You end your turn, the Echo is at 30 feet from you - Echo is not destroyed
Example 2: - At the end of your turn your Echo is at 30 feet from you - In the enemy turn, you are shoved back 5ft - At this point your Echo is 35 feet from you - Echo is not destroyed as long as it doesnt stay that far from you at the end of your next turn
*At Example 1 - Unless you rule that you cannot interupt Echos movement with your Actions.
It's up to the DM to rule whether there's an absolute tether between the echo and the knight, going no more than 30' and if it ever the tether is snapped, then the echo is dismissed at the end of the turn, or the DM rules that only if the echo is more than 30' away from the knight at the end of the turn does it get dismissed.
This would be an excellent way to handicap the echo for jerks like me who've figured out how to mercilessly abuse the subclass, though I suspect for most it would be unnecessary.
Since Echo has substance, can it be use as a cover?
If it can be, since the echo have the same size as the knight, can it be a three-quarters cover?
An Echo lasts until it is destroyed, until you dismiss it as a bonus action, until you manifest another echo, or until you’re incapacitated (or go to sleep).
Is that mean you can destroy a existing echo by manifest another echo in one turn instead of using one bouns action to destroy, and another bouns action to manifest in two turns?
By RAW it is an object so can provide cover. If it took the hit for the target it would get dispelled.
I guess a halfling could also use it to hide behind, assuming the knight is medium sized or larger
A creature or object can provide cover; provided it serves as an obstacle. The game doesn't define what counts as an obstacle, and in fact only gives a few examples. It does goes to far as to imply that friendly creatures don't count, meaning you could fire around an ally, though their space, to hit an enemy. Not necessarily realistic, but definitely cinematic.
There's no right or wrong, here. What matters is the DM is consistent.
I think it'd be reasonable for the echo to provide the same cover that a creature would. Note that if a creature does qualify as cover, it is generally considered half cover, not three-quarters. You could probably make an argument for larger creatures providing more cover, but the Echo is medium or small (outside of special circumstances).
Half Cover
A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend.
Three-Quarters Cover
A target with three-quarters cover has a +5 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has three-quarters cover if about three-quarters of it is covered by an obstacle. The obstacle might be a portcullis, an arrow slit, or a thick tree trunk.
I see where you're coming from, however according to Jeremy Crawford the echo isn't a creature. So rules and guidance for creature interactions shouldn't apply.
For example, the Echo uses the Knight's saving throws where applicable. But if we accept that the Echo is an object, then it automatically fails all Strength and Dexterity saving throws and it is immune to effects that require other saves. So does this make the Echo a special object with an exception to the general rule? Is this just an example of future-proofing in case something down the line can affect it in such a way? Or is the Echo something else entirely, neither creature nor object, because the feature doesn't refer to it as either one?
My main point was that obstacle size/shape determines the type of cover. Whether or not it is a creature, an object, or something else entirely is moot. Cover rules don't care - they just care if the entity is functioning as an obstacle.
If the echo is as tangible as the real creature (which I do think is a bit vague, to be fair), it should be providing the same type of cover that a creature of identical size would provide (half-cover), and not the three-quarter's cover that was suggested in the original question. Its spacial coverage as an obstacle is identical to that of the original creature.
My main point was that obstacle size/shape determines the type of cover. Whether or not it is a creature, an object, or something else entirely is moot. Cover rules don't care - they just care if the entity is functioning as an obstacle.
If the echo is as tangible as the real creature (which I do think is a bit vague, to be fair), it should be providing the same type of cover that a creature of identical size would provide (half-cover), and not the three-quarter's cover that was suggested in the original question. Its coverage as an obstacle is identical to that of the original creature.
If the Echo is an obstacle or not, will be up to the DM. I think most would allow half cover, while behind it. It seems reasonable to me.
I would have to think more about it. But if a player is using their Echo in this manner, often. I would be tempted to treat a miss on the character, as potential for it to hit the Echo ala Mirror Image. Part of me feels this would be unfair though, since we wouldn't do that if you were hiding behind a person. The attack either hits you or it doesn't. But another character isn't semi-translucent, either. So I would have to think more on that part of it. I might just keep it as half cover and move on.
On Movement question 1, your answer is incorrect. While you may choose when to take a bonus action on your turn, you cannot use a bonus action to interrupt an action, which teleporting between attacks would be, as extra attack grants an extra attack, not an attack action. You can however use your normal movement(s) between attacks.
On Movement Question 17, I would make the Argument it is clear. The Echo Knight is immune to conditions including grappled, and therefore cannot be held, and has already been said not to be able to hold things.
Incorrect, on both counts.
So long as the bonus action is not dependent on a trigger, it can be invoked whenever. If an Eldritch Knight wanted to use misty step between two attacks, due to their Extra Attack feature, they could. It's a perfectly legal move. The only restriction on teleporting via Manifest Echo is how much movement the Echo Knight has remaining. So long as they have at least 15 feet of unspent movement, they can teleport.
The Echo Knight is not immune to the grappled condition. They are a creature, and as such they meet all the requirements. Their echo, however, is immune to all conditions, so this may just be a mix-up of terminology. That said, there's nothing expressed in the feature that says the echo cannot hold things. That is an inference based on the interactions of other rules. The current assumption of this thread is that the Echo Knight can initiate a grapple but cannot maintain it because they do not stay within the reach of their target. But any DM can rule differently at their own table. What matters is they are consistent in their application of the rules.
1. Agree on the first paragraph.
2. Agree with the second paragraph, with some reservations. Yes, a DM can rule anything they want. To rule the the Echo can maintain a grapple would be changing the rules though. More to the point, there is nothing that says the Echo can hold things. The Echo is an object. It can't maintain a grappled condition. The Echo Knight would have to be within reach of the target, to maintain the grapple imo. It is NOT the Echo's attack, but the EK's attack being done through the Echo's location.
It's a weird interaction, to be sure, and I'm not convinced the grapple automatically ends. The fighter can make attacks through their echo, including Opportunity Attacks, and Grappling is a special attack they can make. So, RAW, they can initiate a grapple through their echo. And the grappled condition specifies how it ends. Technically, the target never leaves the fighter's reach because the fighter's reach includes the echo and its adjacent spaces.
Truthfully, I'm not sure it matters if the echo is what is grappling the target or if the fighter is. Effects can grapple targets, too. It would be weird to allow one and not the other. If the fighter cannot maintain the grapple through their echo, there would be no point to allowing the grapple attempt in the first place. And yet, they can still initiate the grapple. So logically there must be a payoff.
I'll be the first person in line to say there are some issues with the echo knight's features. I'm just not sure this is one of them.
Except making an attack from the echo's space is not the same as extending your reach to the echo's space. You can make the grapple sure, but you're still not *there* at the end of the turn, so the grapple ends. unless you teleport to swap places with the echo to maintain the grapple.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
If a Knight is allowed to grapple through an Echo, what abuses might arise, or how might this impact the power level of the Subclass?
with minimal investment, you can suddenly grapple four enemies at once. Grapples only take one hand, so the normal person can grapple two things. Echo knights, without any special race investments, can suddenly grapple four, at least 30 feet apart. If it's a Simic Hybrid with the Grappling Appendages, that's eight things within 30 feet being grappled, all of which can then eventually be shoved prone and held down.
that's quite a bit of power.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
But can they really?
The echo isn't grappling the target. It's an object; it literally can't. The echo knight is. The issue is what constitutes a creature's reach. Reach is ill-defined, and what little we have can best be described as a general rule. What we do know is when the echo knight takes the Attack action or makes an Opportunity Attack, the attack may originate from the echo's space. But does that expand their reach? Yes and no. Their reach, if we can quantify it, doesn't expand out from the echo knight's space. But we do have another space from which their reach can originate. And so long as that echo remains active, that duplication of reach remains in effect. It's not explicit, but it is implied.
If the argument is that an echo knight's reach can only extend from the echo knight themself, then they cannot grapple via their echo because the target must be within their reach. But this also ignores how the echo knight can attack through their echo and utilize the attack's full reach in doing so. And their ability to grapple is still limited by the number of hands the echo knight has available. Because, again, the echo isn't able to grapple. It's merely expanding the number of squares on a grid that would fall within the echo knight's reach. The echo knight still needs to be the one grappling the target.
I can see this going either way, and I think that debate is healthy. Ultimately, it's up to the DM to decide. All we can do here is provide thorough rationale.
For the time span of that attack, your reach is extended so that you can attack from the Echo's location. You have to be in constant contact with the grappled target to maintain a grapple. There is nothing in the EK that indicates that when you are attacking from the Echo's position, that you are constantly in that Echo's space. You can attack from the Echo's location, even though you are in a different location...that's all it says you can do. Your reach is the Echo's space, for the time of the attack. Once the attack is over, your reach is your own space again.
That's one way to interpret the rules, yes. What matters most is consistency. Either the target is within their reach or they're not. The feature is mum on whether or not reach is extended and for how long if it is. So, as with most things, it's up to the DM to adjudicate.
You've made your position known. I'm pointing out that there's another valid interpretation.
Ad 5. Comma placement matters. The rule states " If your echo is ever more than 30 feet from you at the end of your turn, it is destroyed."
The Echo is destroyed only if it is more then 30 feet from you at the end of your turn.
Example 1*:
- At the start of your turn, your Echo is 30 feet from you
- You command it to go 15 feet away from you (to the enemy)
- You make your attacks from Echos space
- You command it to go back to you 15 feet
- You end your turn, the Echo is at 30 feet from you
- Echo is not destroyed
Example 2:
- At the end of your turn your Echo is at 30 feet from you
- In the enemy turn, you are shoved back 5ft
- At this point your Echo is 35 feet from you
- Echo is not destroyed as long as it doesnt stay that far from you at the end of your next turn
*At Example 1 - Unless you rule that you cannot interupt Echos movement with your Actions.
Point taken. Anyone have any counter arguments?
None. Perfectly ambiguous, as written.
It's up to the DM to rule whether there's an absolute tether between the echo and the knight, going no more than 30' and if it ever the tether is snapped, then the echo is dismissed at the end of the turn, or the DM rules that only if the echo is more than 30' away from the knight at the end of the turn does it get dismissed.
This would be an excellent way to handicap the echo for jerks like me who've figured out how to mercilessly abuse the subclass, though I suspect for most it would be unnecessary.
Since Echo has substance, can it be use as a cover?
If it can be, since the echo have the same size as the knight, can it be a three-quarters cover?
An Echo lasts until it is destroyed, until you dismiss it as a bonus action, until you manifest another echo, or until you’re incapacitated (or go to sleep).
Is that mean you can destroy a existing echo by manifest another echo in one turn instead of using one bouns action to destroy, and another bouns action to manifest in two turns?
Mmm, interesting...
By RAW it is an object so can provide cover. If it took the hit for the target it would get dispelled.
I guess a halfling could also use it to hide behind, assuming the knight is medium sized or larger
A creature or object can provide cover; provided it serves as an obstacle. The game doesn't define what counts as an obstacle, and in fact only gives a few examples. It does goes to far as to imply that friendly creatures don't count, meaning you could fire around an ally, though their space, to hit an enemy. Not necessarily realistic, but definitely cinematic.
There's no right or wrong, here. What matters is the DM is consistent.
I think it'd be reasonable for the echo to provide the same cover that a creature would. Note that if a creature does qualify as cover, it is generally considered half cover, not three-quarters. You could probably make an argument for larger creatures providing more cover, but the Echo is medium or small (outside of special circumstances).
I see where you're coming from, however according to Jeremy Crawford the echo isn't a creature. So rules and guidance for creature interactions shouldn't apply.
For example, the Echo uses the Knight's saving throws where applicable. But if we accept that the Echo is an object, then it automatically fails all Strength and Dexterity saving throws and it is immune to effects that require other saves. So does this make the Echo a special object with an exception to the general rule? Is this just an example of future-proofing in case something down the line can affect it in such a way? Or is the Echo something else entirely, neither creature nor object, because the feature doesn't refer to it as either one?
My main point was that obstacle size/shape determines the type of cover. Whether or not it is a creature, an object, or something else entirely is moot. Cover rules don't care - they just care if the entity is functioning as an obstacle.
If the echo is as tangible as the real creature (which I do think is a bit vague, to be fair), it should be providing the same type of cover that a creature of identical size would provide (half-cover), and not the three-quarter's cover that was suggested in the original question. Its spacial coverage as an obstacle is identical to that of the original creature.
If the Echo is an obstacle or not, will be up to the DM. I think most would allow half cover, while behind it. It seems reasonable to me.
I would have to think more about it. But if a player is using their Echo in this manner, often. I would be tempted to treat a miss on the character, as potential for it to hit the Echo ala Mirror Image. Part of me feels this would be unfair though, since we wouldn't do that if you were hiding behind a person. The attack either hits you or it doesn't. But another character isn't semi-translucent, either. So I would have to think more on that part of it. I might just keep it as half cover and move on.