How would it interact with Shadow of Moil, or (Greater) Invisibility?
Which is a great question. This causes me to question my original answer. Because if you don't give the attacks advantage for being in darkness, then you wouldn't for being invisible either, since they follow the same rule. It would be negating an invisibility spell cast on a player, to NOT give advantage on the attacks.
True. But it doesn't prevent the Knight from attacking while invisible, and then teleporting away. I would also imagine that if an invisibile Knight used an Echo to attack, this would also cause the invisibility spell to end. So I guess in this case, the Invisibility and Manifest Echo aren't meant to stack well together.
I posited this question in a different forum which deals with the RAW. So far, I think Jounichi may be correct (DM Fiat), since while there are answers for how this would work, they don't seem to be dealing with the RAW. Mostly, it's opinions. So I think we are dealing with a loose ruleset that can't be expected to anticipate every possible scenario. I think there are excellent arguments for both the attack gaining advantage for the EK being unseen, but also not gaining advantage, since the attack is originating in a seen space. I think this may very well be DM Fiat, until Sage Advice or Jeremey Crawford gives some clue as to the RAI.
I suspect the EK will get the advantage from the RAI, but that's just a guess.
How would it interact with Shadow of Moil, or (Greater) Invisibility?
Which is a great question. This causes me to question my original answer. Because if you don't give the attacks advantage for being in darkness, then you wouldn't for being invisible either, since they follow the same rule. It would be negating an invisibility spell cast on a player, to NOT give advantage on the attacks.
Only if the attack is from the echo, the Knight would still get advantage
How would it interact with Shadow of Moil, or (Greater) Invisibility?
Which is a great question. This causes me to question my original answer. Because if you don't give the attacks advantage for being in darkness, then you wouldn't for being invisible either, since they follow the same rule. It would be negating an invisibility spell cast on a player, to NOT give advantage on the attacks.
True. But it doesn't prevent the Knight from attacking while invisible, and then teleporting away. I would also imagine that if an invisibile Knight used an Echo to attack, this would also cause the invisibility spell to end. So I guess in this case, the Invisibility and Manifest Echo aren't meant to stack well together.
Greater invisibility does not end just because you attack.
Also something to note is that While Shadow Of Moil is quite useful to a regular character. it is largely useless on the Echo. it's dimming effect is nice and all but unless you have a way to see through darkness it could work against you and hamper your own attacks and ability to use the Echo. The Echo is also extremely fragile and thus easy to be taken out. it is far more effective as bait than it is to have these kinds of spells on them.
However Both Spells should you be able to get your hands on them are useful to the actual physical body of the echo knight because it does keep you potentially hidden or obscured so that you are harder to hit and/or potentially harder to percieve your exact position. These are things you want on the part of you that can actually suffer real harm. Loss of your Echo uses up a bonus action to resummon it yes but that is minor cost compared to actual loss of health and stuff for your own body. The main point of these spells is not offensive. The offensive part is just a bonus you sometimes get. The main point of these spells is entirely defensive in nature and you are not losing that just because they do not affect your Echo. The offensive bonuses are ones that are also increasingly easy to lose as more abilities are added to the game such as the blind fighting technique and other abilities. So should not be heavily relied upon as offensive tools.
Hopefully this is the place to ask... If you have two echoes, can you move both 30', or just 30' total between the two.
Moving your echo costs no action. And there is nothing that says each of them are unable to do these non-action movements . By level 18 when you can finally get two of them it's not going to change much if you can actually move both of them. They are both effectively one echo each in all ways except for the fact that They have to be created at the same time and are destroyed at the same time by summoning a new one the same way a single one was before that point.
So effectively the way things are written purely by RaW you should be able to move both. Though keep in mind individual DM's may interpret things slightly differently.
Alright, I asked the question on the FB 5e RAW group and the conclusion of some very knowledgeable people is...that the EK gets advantage in the attacks.
The simplest ruling and the one that doesn't make assumptions for things we can't know (such as how the attack manifests through the echo?) is that the EK gets advantage because he/she can't be seen. We know that the EK is unseen in the darkness. We know that the EK can attack from the echo's location. That's literally, about the sum of what we know. How the attack works is unclear. So we just stick with what we know.
"When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."
And don't worry about that the attack is originating in a seen space. They may see the attack, but not the EK. Until we get a Sage Advice or some such on it, this seems like the way to go.
Alright, I asked the question on the FB 5e RAW group and the conclusion of some very knowledgeable people is...that the EK gets advantage in the attacks.
The simplest ruling and the one that doesn't make assumptions for things we can't know (such as how the attack manifests through the echo?) is that the EK gets advantage because he/she can't be seen. We know that the EK is unseen in the darkness. We know that the EK can attack from the echo's location. That's literally, about the sum of what we know. How the attack works is unclear. So we just stick with what we know.
"When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."
And don't worry about that the attack is originating in a seen space. They may see the attack, but not the EK. Until we get a Sage Advice or some such on it, this seems like the way to go.
We actually know more than this.
We know that everything is calculated from where you are considered to be at but not where you are actually at with such abilities. Which is something that your FB group is not taking into account and these things do not in any way require knowing how the attack takes place to calculate either. Which means that there would not actually be Advantage just because your actual self is under such conditions if your echo is not.
Regardless of how the attack actually specifically works does not matter. Because seeing the Echo is effectively the same as seeing the Echo Knight if they attack from the space of the Echo. Otherwise you create the argument that the Echo Knight should get advantage if they are somehow standing around a corner even though nothing in the rules actually in any way gives them advantage for that as well as create openings that any attacks should gain advantage simply from attacking from the Echo because they have no way to know an attack is ever coming from the Echo rather than the Echo knight themselves even if they can see the Echo Knight and thus their defenses are going to be diminished against such attacks and we actually know that neither is true. Both of which are also situations that your FB group clearly did not consider as they white roomed what an "easy" solution for an answer.
The Actual Easy answer and much more logical answer that opens up none of these holes in logic is exactly what several of us said in this thread. These things are based upon the square of the Echo and your physical position does not matter except for needs of your own ability to perceive other things as called out by the abilities of the Echo Knight already in terms such as being able to see enemies move away from your echo, needing to see where your placing the echo, being able to perceive what's around the echo to make attacks, and other such things about the abilities of the Echo Knight as concerning their Echo.
Alright, I asked the question on the FB 5e RAW group and the conclusion of some very knowledgeable people is...that the EK gets advantage in the attacks.
The simplest ruling and the one that doesn't make assumptions for things we can't know (such as how the attack manifests through the echo?) is that the EK gets advantage because he/she can't be seen. We know that the EK is unseen in the darkness. We know that the EK can attack from the echo's location. That's literally, about the sum of what we know. How the attack works is unclear. So we just stick with what we know.
"When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."
And don't worry about that the attack is originating in a seen space. They may see the attack, but not the EK. Until we get a Sage Advice or some such on it, this seems like the way to go.
We actually know more than this.
We know that everything is calculated from where you are considered to be at but not where you are actually at with such abilities. Which is something that your FB group is not taking into account and these things do not in any way require knowing how the attack takes place to calculate either. Which means that there would not actually be Advantage just because your actual self is under such conditions if your echo is not.
Regardless of how the attack actually specifically works does not matter. Because seeing the Echo is effectively the same as seeing the Echo Knight if they attack from the space of the Echo. Otherwise you create the argument that the Echo Knight should get advantage if they are somehow standing around a corner even though nothing in the rules actually in any way gives them advantage for that as well as create openings that any attacks should gain advantage simply from attacking from the Echo because they have no way to know an attack is ever coming from the Echo rather than the Echo knight themselves even if they can see the Echo Knight and thus their defenses are going to be diminished against such attacks and we actually know that neither is true. Both of which are also situations that your FB group clearly did not consider as they white roomed what an "easy" solution for an answer.
The Actual Easy answer and much more logical answer that opens up none of these holes in logic is exactly what several of us said in this thread. These things are based upon the square of the Echo and your physical position does not matter except for needs of your own ability to perceive other things as called out by the abilities of the Echo Knight already in terms such as being able to see enemies move away from your echo, needing to see where your placing the echo, being able to perceive what's around the echo to make attacks, and other such things about the abilities of the Echo Knight as concerning their Echo.
That sounds like a lot of assumptions and what would have to be DM Fiat. Use the RAW, not your opinion.
Alright, I asked the question on the FB 5e RAW group and the conclusion of some very knowledgeable people is...that the EK gets advantage in the attacks.
The simplest ruling and the one that doesn't make assumptions for things we can't know (such as how the attack manifests through the echo?) is that the EK gets advantage because he/she can't be seen. We know that the EK is unseen in the darkness. We know that the EK can attack from the echo's location. That's literally, about the sum of what we know. How the attack works is unclear. So we just stick with what we know.
"When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."
And don't worry about that the attack is originating in a seen space. They may see the attack, but not the EK. Until we get a Sage Advice or some such on it, this seems like the way to go.
We actually know more than this.
We know that everything is calculated from where you are considered to be at but not where you are actually at with such abilities. Which is something that your FB group is not taking into account and these things do not in any way require knowing how the attack takes place to calculate either. Which means that there would not actually be Advantage just because your actual self is under such conditions if your echo is not.
Regardless of how the attack actually specifically works does not matter. Because seeing the Echo is effectively the same as seeing the Echo Knight if they attack from the space of the Echo. Otherwise you create the argument that the Echo Knight should get advantage if they are somehow standing around a corner even though nothing in the rules actually in any way gives them advantage for that as well as create openings that any attacks should gain advantage simply from attacking from the Echo because they have no way to know an attack is ever coming from the Echo rather than the Echo knight themselves even if they can see the Echo Knight and thus their defenses are going to be diminished against such attacks and we actually know that neither is true. Both of which are also situations that your FB group clearly did not consider as they white roomed what an "easy" solution for an answer.
The Actual Easy answer and much more logical answer that opens up none of these holes in logic is exactly what several of us said in this thread. These things are based upon the square of the Echo and your physical position does not matter except for needs of your own ability to perceive other things as called out by the abilities of the Echo Knight already in terms such as being able to see enemies move away from your echo, needing to see where your placing the echo, being able to perceive what's around the echo to make attacks, and other such things about the abilities of the Echo Knight as concerning their Echo.
That sounds like a lot of assumptions and what would have to be DM Fiat. Use the RAW, not your opinion.
It's not a lot of assumptions. It's using RaW to come to an unbiased conclusion. One that you clearly don't seem to like so your dismissing it out of hand.
It's very assumptive to push the position that just because you don't know how the attack is made that you should actually ignore anything to do with the space the attack is coming from and like I said it opens up several holes and potential abuses. These are not opinions that these abuses are opened up. These are actual problems created within RaW because of the way that RaW works. I can also point out the likely counter argument to my holes. "Well The Rules don't say that you should get advantage just because I don't know the attack is going to come from the Echo." But the counter argument to that complaint quickly becomes "If you can't see that the attack is going to come from the echo then the unseen attacker rules (or the Surprise attack rules, Or the STealth Attack rules, or whatever rules people feel like they can tenuously justify) should apply to any attack coming from the Echo regardless of the fact that they can see it because we don't know how the attacks are made, and these people I can point to said that they do apply for this very same basic reasoning so therefore you can't say the they don't somehow apply now." since assumptive reasoning is already being made why people should get advantage under the circumstances of not being able to see your physical body even when they can see the echo and thus potentially defend themselves adequately from attacks from the echo, and thus the reasoning for that decision should be extended to other attacks from the Echo as well on the sheer grounds that because we don't know how the attacks are made then the enemy should not be able to guard against them effectively at any time.
It's much easier without assumption to actually work on the basis that has already been expressed in this thread saying that the place of the Echo and thus the "effective origin" of the attack as written by the exact powers being used should be applied per RaW unless you have a vested interest on garnering that advantage to the attacks for some reason, Which many players. Specially many "knowledgeable and experienced" players actually do have a vested interest in doing.
Objectively RaW does not care where your physical body is located. RaW only cares about the square in which the attack is coming from. The Ability in this instance States quite clearly where the attack is coming from regardless of how it is done. That is the Location of the Echo. This is done by being written expressly with the words: "When you take the Attack action on your turn, any attack you make with that action can originate from your space or the echo's space. You make this choice for each attack."
The bolded Part is the key phrasing that is being ignored in favor of Twisting it by reasoning of "We don't know how the attack is made so (or the Echo's Space) should be ignored out of convenience for Justification." With the Problem Being that the entire Statement and in particular the Bolded Part Does not in any way care about how the attack is made in the first place for the reasoning to hold any meaning. It only cares about the Spacing as a concern for the effective origin of the Attack, so Objectively to reach an unassuming and unbiased conclusion. We have to work from the Spacing of the Echo to say whether any other factors apply because by Saying the Echo's Space it is removing any requirement for the factors of your Space to Apply. It is really that simple and Completely by RaW because of this Very Phrasing in the ability of the Echo itself.
Because Realistically. Many things about the Echo do not care about the state of the Fighter and the space the prime physical body is in at all with the Exception of you being to see it and it ever getting Farther than 30 feet from your physical body under normal working circumstances. Even the Matter of it disappearing when the Fighter gets Incapacitated does not care about the spacing of the Fighters physical body. Nor does it care whether you are Invisible, Standing In Darkness, Hasted , or even polymorphed into a chicken after it's been summoned does not matter to the Echo (there is some grey area and DM intervention required on summoning another as a chicken however because that's not adequately covered by RaW) because It either cannot or may not share these same effects as your physical form depending on the kind of effects that they are. It Does not even care what kind of weapon you are holding to Make the extra Melee Attack from the usage of Unleash Avatar by RaW leading to some confusion about what kind of weapon and how it is making the melee attack in that situation because you could be using a ranged weapon but this attack is by the nature of the ability forced to be a melee attack which just reinforces that the space that it occupies is the important defining factor to what takes place regarding attacks from the avatar's position because this forced Melee attack imposes several details on the situation regardless of the situation of the physical body because if you are holding and attacking with a ranged weapon you should automatically be imposing disadvantage on the attack, However it being a melee attack from the Echo automatically negates this imposed disadvantage, Which is just further objective Context why the state of of the spacing and extra effects on your physical body do not actually automatically apply to the echo.
Echo Avatar Further reinforces that circumstances of your spacing and your conditions do not apply because when you are using it to scout and actively controlling it by RaW your body is rendered Deaf and Blind but the Avatar is not because it actively calls out that you are seeing throw it's Eyes and Ears, But even more than that is There is nothing by RaW that says that any extra sensory ability that you may have actually in any way applies to the Echo Avatar when you are using it in this state or that it has any of it's own. Any Claims that you extra sensory abilities are shared by the Echo or usable when using the Echo Avatar ability are purely assumptive reasoning about RaI. Because we know by various other Effects such as Find Familiar and the Manifest Mind ability of the Order of Scribes that RaW would call out if it had special senses and your ability to use them which Echo Avatar does not do so Purely By RaW it does not do these things and our own Do Not Transfer over Because the Powers do not in any way say that they do. Manifest Mind also helps us Further establish Raw because it helps to define what using the Space of an effect like this means by the way it is written which is a good accompaniment to the way that The Ability of the Echo to attack is written because instead of using the words "Your space of the Echo's space" it uses the Phrasing "The Spectral Minds Space, instead of your Own," in it's extremely similar but slightly different Circumstance ability. The Difference being Driven primarily by the fact that most spells can end up well outside of their effective range from your physical space otherwise, but the Echo is going to always be within it's effective usability range and assumed by RaW to be visible to you and within proper range of making it's attacks or you would not be making them through the echo.
These are all basic details logically applied from RaW using only the way that they are put into the books. Personally I think with certain details such as the senses for the Echo Avatar that the RaI is very different and that they are supposed to share things like the senses you possess despite the fact that the book does not express this detail in any way. Quite Frankly if I was going to use assumptive Opinion over RaW. I'd also argue that we have basis for RaI about exactly how the attacks are actually made to put to rest a number of problems about this whole issue as well as several others but I haven't.
RAW is they can't see the attacker, the attack is made with advantage. Period. There are no qualifications or caveats about whether the attack itself can be seen. You may disagree with the RAW, but the RAW is what it is.
How Manifest Echo works and does it actually switch places with the echo for that second of the attack and such? We don't know. So until we get a Sage Advice or some such giving us an explanation, the RAW would be advantage for the attack. Now a DM can decide to play it however they want. But the RAW would be advantage for the EK, until we get the RAI down the road.
RAW is they can't see the attacker, the attack is made with advantage. Period. There are no qualifications or caveats about whether the attack itself can be seen. You may disagree with the RAW, but the RAW is what it is.
How Manifest Echo works and does it actually switch places with the echo for that second of the attack and such? We don't know. So until we get a Sage Advice or some such giving us an explanation, the RAW would be advantage for the attack. Now a DM can decide to play it however they want. But the RAW would be advantage for the EK, until we get the RAI down the road.
RaW is not that they cannot see the Attacker. Because they can effectively see the position of the Echo and from that position they effectively can see the attacker.
The Argument that they cannot see the Attacker is based not on the space of the Origin of the Attack and thus the Echo is based upon the Physical Body which RaW does not care abouti t's actual position to attack from the Echo's position.
It's assumptive and interpretive to shift things to the Echo Knights Physical body and the space of the physical body despite that they do not matter for attacks from the Echo's location. The Echo's location is effectively the point of the Attack and the Echo in essence is the source of the Attack regardless of of the workings of how that attack manifests. It does not need to know how attacking from that space works to reach this point. Just simply the RaW about attacking for anything else attacking from that space when you remove the issue of the Echo.
RAW is they can't see the attacker, the attack is made with advantage. Period. There are no qualifications or caveats about whether the attack itself can be seen. You may disagree with the RAW, but the RAW is what it is.
How Manifest Echo works and does it actually switch places with the echo for that second of the attack and such? We don't know. So until we get a Sage Advice or some such giving us an explanation, the RAW would be advantage for the attack. Now a DM can decide to play it however they want. But the RAW would be advantage for the EK, until we get the RAI down the road.
RaW is not that they cannot see the Attacker. Because they can effectively see the position of the Echo and from that position they effectively can see the attacker.
The Argument that they cannot see the Attacker is based not on the space of the Origin of the Attack and thus the Echo is based upon the Physical Body which RaW does not care abouti t's actual position to attack from the Echo's position.
It's assumptive and interpretive to shift things to the Echo Knights Physical body and the space of the physical body despite that they do not matter for attacks from the Echo's location. The Echo's location is effectively the point of the Attack and the Echo in essence is the source of the Attack regardless of of the workings of how that attack manifests. It does not need to know how attacking from that space works to reach this point. Just simply the RaW about attacking for anything else attacking from that space when you remove the issue of the Echo.
I suggest splitting the difference.
The attacker is the Echo Knight; whose actual position could very well be obscured or otherwise indiscernible. This would make them "unseen." But the moment they attack from the known location of the echo, they attack as if they were in the echo's space. And because the echo is known, the attacker is also known.
RAW is they can't see the attacker, the attack is made with advantage. Period. There are no qualifications or caveats about whether the attack itself can be seen. You may disagree with the RAW, but the RAW is what it is.
How Manifest Echo works and does it actually switch places with the echo for that second of the attack and such? We don't know. So until we get a Sage Advice or some such giving us an explanation, the RAW would be advantage for the attack. Now a DM can decide to play it however they want. But the RAW would be advantage for the EK, until we get the RAI down the road.
RaW is not that they cannot see the Attacker. Because they can effectively see the position of the Echo and from that position they effectively can see the attacker.
The Argument that they cannot see the Attacker is based not on the space of the Origin of the Attack and thus the Echo is based upon the Physical Body which RaW does not care abouti t's actual position to attack from the Echo's position.
It's assumptive and interpretive to shift things to the Echo Knights Physical body and the space of the physical body despite that they do not matter for attacks from the Echo's location. The Echo's location is effectively the point of the Attack and the Echo in essence is the source of the Attack regardless of of the workings of how that attack manifests. It does not need to know how attacking from that space works to reach this point. Just simply the RaW about attacking for anything else attacking from that space when you remove the issue of the Echo.
I suggest splitting the difference.
The attacker is the Echo Knight; whose actual position could very well be obscured or otherwise indiscernible. This would make them "unseen." But the moment they attack from the known location of the echo, they attack as if they were in the echo's space. And because the echo is known, the attacker is also known.
We don't know how the EK attacks through the space of the Echo. Things we know are...EK is heavily obscured and the EK can attack from the Echo's space. How all that works is unclear. So we have an unseen attacker, who can attack a creature not next to them. Unseen attackers get advantage.
Maybe the EK, for that second, is teleporting to the Echo's space to make the attack and the defender CAN see you? Maybe only the attack itself goes from the space to the defender and there is nothing to see, but that attack itself? We don't know any of this. Since we don't know and won't know, until there is some further clarification from a Sage Advice or some such, then the default RAW is the EK is an unseen attacker.
And obviously, we all know a DM can see this any way they want, since I think there are good arguments for both positions.
Thank you! I am hopelessly fascinated with this subclass and hope to play it next!
I am trying to decide my origin(race) and primary weapon,
Polearm or Greatweapon
Probably with Sentinel, I need to comb this FAQ to confirm how the Echo can make use of sentinel but still good for the Knight, same with PAM if going polearm.
I am a little concerned if the encounters might be too repetitive but I think the DM can accommodate/ rise to the challenge.
I had another idea, concerning the grapple, can the KNIGHT preform a grapple with a dedicated hand, and then still attack through the ECHO with the echo positioned at another creatures?
Was thinking of a dueling fighter holding one enemy, can attack it but also agro other enemies through the echo, this can be done without grapple by splitting the attack actions, may also be redundant with sentinel, or would it be more of a lockdown?
Also thematically I love the idea of the knight charging a target, striking and then bonus action swapping away or charging with the echo and then attacking through it, or flying the echo at the enemy from above or slightly off the ground like a spooky wraith
I had another idea, concerning the grapple, can the KNIGHT preform a grapple with a dedicated hand, and then still attack through the ECHO with the echo positioned at another creatures?
Are you asking if the EK can do a grapple? Of if the EK can use the Echo to make a grapple?
I think earlier in this thread (which is a long one), they determined that an EK can make a grapple attack through the Echo, but it's kind of pointless, since you have to be within reach of the target to maintain the grapple. So you could grapple through the Echo, for that attack, but once your attack is over, unless you are also near the target, the Echo can't maintain it. You can't maintain a grapple from 20 ft away or whatever it is. So it would be a pointless grapple.
Under Grappled condition is a listing the ways it can be removed.
"The condition also ends if an effect removes the grappled creature from the reach of the grappler or grappling effect, such as when a creature is hurled away by the thunderwave spell."
I had another idea, concerning the grapple, can the KNIGHT preform a grapple with a dedicated hand, and then still attack through the ECHO with the echo positioned at another creatures?
Are you asking if the EK can do a grapple? Of if the EK can use the Echo to make a grapple?
I think earlier in this thread (which is a long one), they determined that an EK can make a grapple attack through the Echo, but it's kind of pointless, since you have to be within reach of the target to maintain the grapple. So you could grapple through the Echo, for that attack, but once your attack is over, unless you are also near the target, the Echo can't maintain it. You can't maintain a grapple from 20 ft away or whatever it is. So it would be a pointless grapple.
Under Grappled condition is a listing the ways it can be removed.
"The condition also ends if an effect removes the grappled creature from the reach of the grappler or grappling effect, such as when a creature is hurled away by the thunderwave spell."
Torvald is completely correct on the Grapple. It's basically pointless. you could technically do it but through no action of your own you'd voluntarily break the grapple because of your positioning immediately after.
it's another one of those things that for the duration of the attack. Your capable of doing it because it's all calculated form the Echo's position and doesn't care about the position of your physical body. But once you finish the attack. Everything reverts to your physical body which is suddenly incapable of fulfilling one or more criteria of maintaining a grapple such as distance.
I was asking if the Knight can maintain a grapple on its own target and then make an attack through the echo either on the same target, but more specifically on a target only in range of the echo.
can knight grapple target a, and then attack target b through the echo?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
True. But it doesn't prevent the Knight from attacking while invisible, and then teleporting away. I would also imagine that if an invisibile Knight used an Echo to attack, this would also cause the invisibility spell to end. So I guess in this case, the Invisibility and Manifest Echo aren't meant to stack well together.
I posited this question in a different forum which deals with the RAW. So far, I think Jounichi may be correct (DM Fiat), since while there are answers for how this would work, they don't seem to be dealing with the RAW. Mostly, it's opinions. So I think we are dealing with a loose ruleset that can't be expected to anticipate every possible scenario. I think there are excellent arguments for both the attack gaining advantage for the EK being unseen, but also not gaining advantage, since the attack is originating in a seen space. I think this may very well be DM Fiat, until Sage Advice or Jeremey Crawford gives some clue as to the RAI.
I suspect the EK will get the advantage from the RAI, but that's just a guess.
Only if the attack is from the echo, the Knight would still get advantage
Greater invisibility does not end just because you attack.
Also something to note is that While Shadow Of Moil is quite useful to a regular character. it is largely useless on the Echo. it's dimming effect is nice and all but unless you have a way to see through darkness it could work against you and hamper your own attacks and ability to use the Echo. The Echo is also extremely fragile and thus easy to be taken out. it is far more effective as bait than it is to have these kinds of spells on them.
However Both Spells should you be able to get your hands on them are useful to the actual physical body of the echo knight because it does keep you potentially hidden or obscured so that you are harder to hit and/or potentially harder to percieve your exact position. These are things you want on the part of you that can actually suffer real harm. Loss of your Echo uses up a bonus action to resummon it yes but that is minor cost compared to actual loss of health and stuff for your own body. The main point of these spells is not offensive. The offensive part is just a bonus you sometimes get. The main point of these spells is entirely defensive in nature and you are not losing that just because they do not affect your Echo. The offensive bonuses are ones that are also increasingly easy to lose as more abilities are added to the game such as the blind fighting technique and other abilities. So should not be heavily relied upon as offensive tools.
Hopefully this is the place to ask... If you have two echoes, can you move both 30', or just 30' total between the two.
Given that it does not specify, and moving an echo costs no movement/action/bonus.....as a DM, i'd be inclined to say both can be moved the full 30ft.
edit: I might also be biased, because I'll finally be playing in a game with my own echo knight soon.
Moving your echo costs no action. And there is nothing that says each of them are unable to do these non-action movements . By level 18 when you can finally get two of them it's not going to change much if you can actually move both of them. They are both effectively one echo each in all ways except for the fact that They have to be created at the same time and are destroyed at the same time by summoning a new one the same way a single one was before that point.
So effectively the way things are written purely by RaW you should be able to move both. Though keep in mind individual DM's may interpret things slightly differently.
Alright, I asked the question on the FB 5e RAW group and the conclusion of some very knowledgeable people is...that the EK gets advantage in the attacks.
The simplest ruling and the one that doesn't make assumptions for things we can't know (such as how the attack manifests through the echo?) is that the EK gets advantage because he/she can't be seen. We know that the EK is unseen in the darkness. We know that the EK can attack from the echo's location. That's literally, about the sum of what we know. How the attack works is unclear. So we just stick with what we know.
"When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."
We actually know more than this.
We know that everything is calculated from where you are considered to be at but not where you are actually at with such abilities. Which is something that your FB group is not taking into account and these things do not in any way require knowing how the attack takes place to calculate either. Which means that there would not actually be Advantage just because your actual self is under such conditions if your echo is not.
Regardless of how the attack actually specifically works does not matter. Because seeing the Echo is effectively the same as seeing the Echo Knight if they attack from the space of the Echo. Otherwise you create the argument that the Echo Knight should get advantage if they are somehow standing around a corner even though nothing in the rules actually in any way gives them advantage for that as well as create openings that any attacks should gain advantage simply from attacking from the Echo because they have no way to know an attack is ever coming from the Echo rather than the Echo knight themselves even if they can see the Echo Knight and thus their defenses are going to be diminished against such attacks and we actually know that neither is true. Both of which are also situations that your FB group clearly did not consider as they white roomed what an "easy" solution for an answer.
The Actual Easy answer and much more logical answer that opens up none of these holes in logic is exactly what several of us said in this thread. These things are based upon the square of the Echo and your physical position does not matter except for needs of your own ability to perceive other things as called out by the abilities of the Echo Knight already in terms such as being able to see enemies move away from your echo, needing to see where your placing the echo, being able to perceive what's around the echo to make attacks, and other such things about the abilities of the Echo Knight as concerning their Echo.
That sounds like a lot of assumptions and what would have to be DM Fiat. Use the RAW, not your opinion.
It's not a lot of assumptions. It's using RaW to come to an unbiased conclusion. One that you clearly don't seem to like so your dismissing it out of hand.
It's very assumptive to push the position that just because you don't know how the attack is made that you should actually ignore anything to do with the space the attack is coming from and like I said it opens up several holes and potential abuses. These are not opinions that these abuses are opened up. These are actual problems created within RaW because of the way that RaW works. I can also point out the likely counter argument to my holes. "Well The Rules don't say that you should get advantage just because I don't know the attack is going to come from the Echo." But the counter argument to that complaint quickly becomes "If you can't see that the attack is going to come from the echo then the unseen attacker rules (or the Surprise attack rules, Or the STealth Attack rules, or whatever rules people feel like they can tenuously justify) should apply to any attack coming from the Echo regardless of the fact that they can see it because we don't know how the attacks are made, and these people I can point to said that they do apply for this very same basic reasoning so therefore you can't say the they don't somehow apply now." since assumptive reasoning is already being made why people should get advantage under the circumstances of not being able to see your physical body even when they can see the echo and thus potentially defend themselves adequately from attacks from the echo, and thus the reasoning for that decision should be extended to other attacks from the Echo as well on the sheer grounds that because we don't know how the attacks are made then the enemy should not be able to guard against them effectively at any time.
It's much easier without assumption to actually work on the basis that has already been expressed in this thread saying that the place of the Echo and thus the "effective origin" of the attack as written by the exact powers being used should be applied per RaW unless you have a vested interest on garnering that advantage to the attacks for some reason, Which many players. Specially many "knowledgeable and experienced" players actually do have a vested interest in doing.
Objectively RaW does not care where your physical body is located. RaW only cares about the square in which the attack is coming from. The Ability in this instance States quite clearly where the attack is coming from regardless of how it is done. That is the Location of the Echo. This is done by being written expressly with the words: "When you take the Attack action on your turn, any attack you make with that action can originate from your space or the echo's space. You make this choice for each attack."
The bolded Part is the key phrasing that is being ignored in favor of Twisting it by reasoning of "We don't know how the attack is made so (or the Echo's Space) should be ignored out of convenience for Justification." With the Problem Being that the entire Statement and in particular the Bolded Part Does not in any way care about how the attack is made in the first place for the reasoning to hold any meaning. It only cares about the Spacing as a concern for the effective origin of the Attack, so Objectively to reach an unassuming and unbiased conclusion. We have to work from the Spacing of the Echo to say whether any other factors apply because by Saying the Echo's Space it is removing any requirement for the factors of your Space to Apply. It is really that simple and Completely by RaW because of this Very Phrasing in the ability of the Echo itself.
Because Realistically. Many things about the Echo do not care about the state of the Fighter and the space the prime physical body is in at all with the Exception of you being to see it and it ever getting Farther than 30 feet from your physical body under normal working circumstances. Even the Matter of it disappearing when the Fighter gets Incapacitated does not care about the spacing of the Fighters physical body. Nor does it care whether you are Invisible, Standing In Darkness, Hasted , or even polymorphed into a chicken after it's been summoned does not matter to the Echo (there is some grey area and DM intervention required on summoning another as a chicken however because that's not adequately covered by RaW) because It either cannot or may not share these same effects as your physical form depending on the kind of effects that they are. It Does not even care what kind of weapon you are holding to Make the extra Melee Attack from the usage of Unleash Avatar by RaW leading to some confusion about what kind of weapon and how it is making the melee attack in that situation because you could be using a ranged weapon but this attack is by the nature of the ability forced to be a melee attack which just reinforces that the space that it occupies is the important defining factor to what takes place regarding attacks from the avatar's position because this forced Melee attack imposes several details on the situation regardless of the situation of the physical body because if you are holding and attacking with a ranged weapon you should automatically be imposing disadvantage on the attack, However it being a melee attack from the Echo automatically negates this imposed disadvantage, Which is just further objective Context why the state of of the spacing and extra effects on your physical body do not actually automatically apply to the echo.
Echo Avatar Further reinforces that circumstances of your spacing and your conditions do not apply because when you are using it to scout and actively controlling it by RaW your body is rendered Deaf and Blind but the Avatar is not because it actively calls out that you are seeing throw it's Eyes and Ears, But even more than that is There is nothing by RaW that says that any extra sensory ability that you may have actually in any way applies to the Echo Avatar when you are using it in this state or that it has any of it's own. Any Claims that you extra sensory abilities are shared by the Echo or usable when using the Echo Avatar ability are purely assumptive reasoning about RaI. Because we know by various other Effects such as Find Familiar and the Manifest Mind ability of the Order of Scribes that RaW would call out if it had special senses and your ability to use them which Echo Avatar does not do so Purely By RaW it does not do these things and our own Do Not Transfer over Because the Powers do not in any way say that they do. Manifest Mind also helps us Further establish Raw because it helps to define what using the Space of an effect like this means by the way it is written which is a good accompaniment to the way that The Ability of the Echo to attack is written because instead of using the words "Your space of the Echo's space" it uses the Phrasing "The Spectral Minds Space, instead of your Own," in it's extremely similar but slightly different Circumstance ability. The Difference being Driven primarily by the fact that most spells can end up well outside of their effective range from your physical space otherwise, but the Echo is going to always be within it's effective usability range and assumed by RaW to be visible to you and within proper range of making it's attacks or you would not be making them through the echo.
These are all basic details logically applied from RaW using only the way that they are put into the books. Personally I think with certain details such as the senses for the Echo Avatar that the RaI is very different and that they are supposed to share things like the senses you possess despite the fact that the book does not express this detail in any way. Quite Frankly if I was going to use assumptive Opinion over RaW. I'd also argue that we have basis for RaI about exactly how the attacks are actually made to put to rest a number of problems about this whole issue as well as several others but I haven't.
RAW is they can't see the attacker, the attack is made with advantage. Period. There are no qualifications or caveats about whether the attack itself can be seen. You may disagree with the RAW, but the RAW is what it is.
How Manifest Echo works and does it actually switch places with the echo for that second of the attack and such? We don't know. So until we get a Sage Advice or some such giving us an explanation, the RAW would be advantage for the attack. Now a DM can decide to play it however they want. But the RAW would be advantage for the EK, until we get the RAI down the road.
RaW is not that they cannot see the Attacker. Because they can effectively see the position of the Echo and from that position they effectively can see the attacker.
The Argument that they cannot see the Attacker is based not on the space of the Origin of the Attack and thus the Echo is based upon the Physical Body which RaW does not care abouti t's actual position to attack from the Echo's position.
It's assumptive and interpretive to shift things to the Echo Knights Physical body and the space of the physical body despite that they do not matter for attacks from the Echo's location. The Echo's location is effectively the point of the Attack and the Echo in essence is the source of the Attack regardless of of the workings of how that attack manifests. It does not need to know how attacking from that space works to reach this point. Just simply the RaW about attacking for anything else attacking from that space when you remove the issue of the Echo.
I suggest splitting the difference.
The attacker is the Echo Knight; whose actual position could very well be obscured or otherwise indiscernible. This would make them "unseen." But the moment they attack from the known location of the echo, they attack as if they were in the echo's space. And because the echo is known, the attacker is also known.
We don't know how the EK attacks through the space of the Echo. Things we know are...EK is heavily obscured and the EK can attack from the Echo's space. How all that works is unclear. So we have an unseen attacker, who can attack a creature not next to them. Unseen attackers get advantage.
Maybe the EK, for that second, is teleporting to the Echo's space to make the attack and the defender CAN see you? Maybe only the attack itself goes from the space to the defender and there is nothing to see, but that attack itself? We don't know any of this. Since we don't know and won't know, until there is some further clarification from a Sage Advice or some such, then the default RAW is the EK is an unseen attacker.
And obviously, we all know a DM can see this any way they want, since I think there are good arguments for both positions.
Have a great day. :)
Thank you! I am hopelessly fascinated with this subclass and hope to play it next!
I am trying to decide my origin(race) and primary weapon,
Polearm or Greatweapon
Probably with Sentinel, I need to comb this FAQ to confirm how the Echo can make use of sentinel but still good for the Knight, same with PAM if going polearm.
I am a little concerned if the encounters might be too repetitive but I think the DM can accommodate/ rise to the challenge.
I had another idea, concerning the grapple, can the KNIGHT preform a grapple with a dedicated hand, and then still attack through the ECHO with the echo positioned at another creatures?
Was thinking of a dueling fighter holding one enemy, can attack it but also agro other enemies through the echo, this can be done without grapple by splitting the attack actions, may also be redundant with sentinel, or would it be more of a lockdown?
I look forward to reading the FAQ more in-depth!
Also thematically I love the idea of the knight charging a target, striking and then bonus action swapping away or charging with the echo and then attacking through it, or flying the echo at the enemy from above or slightly off the ground like a spooky wraith
Are you asking if the EK can do a grapple? Of if the EK can use the Echo to make a grapple?
I think earlier in this thread (which is a long one), they determined that an EK can make a grapple attack through the Echo, but it's kind of pointless, since you have to be within reach of the target to maintain the grapple. So you could grapple through the Echo, for that attack, but once your attack is over, unless you are also near the target, the Echo can't maintain it. You can't maintain a grapple from 20 ft away or whatever it is. So it would be a pointless grapple.
Under Grappled condition is a listing the ways it can be removed.
Torvald is completely correct on the Grapple. It's basically pointless. you could technically do it but through no action of your own you'd voluntarily break the grapple because of your positioning immediately after.
it's another one of those things that for the duration of the attack. Your capable of doing it because it's all calculated form the Echo's position and doesn't care about the position of your physical body. But once you finish the attack. Everything reverts to your physical body which is suddenly incapable of fulfilling one or more criteria of maintaining a grapple such as distance.
I was asking if the Knight can maintain a grapple on its own target and then make an attack through the echo either on the same target, but more specifically on a target only in range of the echo.
can knight grapple target a, and then attack target b through the echo?