You can fake your own death. Here is how. You make an echo of yourself as a bonus action, somewhere out of their line of sight, then give a cheesy line "I will not be taken alive" and use echo Avatar feature as your action. Then as you are deafened and blinded, you walk backwards off a cliff and count to six while your echo is running away in another direction, after counting to six, you swap your place with your echo.
Except the echo doesn't really look enough like you to fool anybody imo. The echo is a "magical, translucent, gray image of you!" So...unless you're normally gray and light passes through you, nobody will be fooled! ;)
You can fake your own death. Here is how. You make an echo of yourself as a bonus action, somewhere out of their line of sight, then give a cheesy line "I will not be taken alive" and use echo Avatar feature as your action. Then as you are deafened and blinded, you walk backwards off a cliff and count to six while your echo is running away in another direction, after counting to six, you swap your place with your echo.
Except the echo doesn't really look enough like you to fool anybody imo. The echo is a "magical, translucent, gray image of you!" So...unless you're normally gray and light passes through you, nobody will be fooled! ;)
The situation VahidHashemi presented will still work because it is not trying to make the observer think the echo is real. The echo is out of sight. The "real you" really does fall off the cliff and then, while falling, swaps places with the echo. (Assuming the viewer is not in a place to see the entirety of the fall.)
Hello, it has been a long time since the last post here, but I find myself in a problem and need some help to find a solution to a problem that has been occurring to me in the campaign that I am DM.
One of the players is an Echo Knight, and he has consistently used the fact that he can summon an Echo as a Bonus action to summon one at the forefront of the party and act as a permanent shield, like the Echo is at the frontline, creature A moves towards it and attacks the echo were if it hits him ends the echo, at his turn the player use a bonus action to summon another echo at the frontline forcing the creature to have to attack it once again, and if the creature defeats the echo and then moves forward towards the other members, they just retreat to leave space in the frontline for a new echo. Anda that has been done repeatedly where sometimes in a fight the echo is killed 10 or more times and the players are mostly unharmed.
Any thoughts on such a situation and how to fix that? Any help would be welcome. At first, I was thinking to limit the number of times he can manifest echo, but that would be going against all rules and decisions on this topic, later I was thinking of having the creatures ignore the echo and go directly toward the players, but that would create a whole new slew of problems.
Thats like saying "This wizard in our group keeps casting these spells and these spells keep stopping the enemy or killing them, any way to stop the wizard from casting spells?" dude, thats what wizards do, and creating an echo is what Echo Knights do. Why would you possibly limit this? Just give the creature more than one attack, now it can kill the echo and attack another player, or it ignores the echo and goes after everyone else. Yes it will get an AO but it could miss and even if it doesn't most enemies don't die from one hit. Also, usually there's more than one enemy, so other enemies can attack them too. So many options other than changing the player's ability to use their core feature. I'm guessing you're very new to DMing but there are other options than nerfing a character and ultimately taking fun away from them.
1 - Bravo. Several of the other question should just say see rule one, "The echo never attacks. The knight attacks from the echo's position.""
6 - technically correct, but it's the wrong question (see rule one). The knight gains the benefit of flanking if they are in that square.
10 - re: Haste, the general consensus on most sites is no. Although "some debate" will probably always be true, for what it's worth, unless we get an official ruling
12 - you can attack something you cannot see
13 - correct on cover, but see 12 for obscurement
4 - it's pretty clear that grapple and shove are attacks you take as part of the attack action. Shove works fine. However, a successful grapple would immediately be broken if the knight is out of reach, so it's kind of moot (unless you're cheesing a falling rule on flying creatures at an overly literal RAW table).
ranged:
1 - note that this is relevant for the "ranged attacks in close combat" rule
movement:
14 - I know you're making a joke, or future proofing, but one bonus action is a hard rule, currently
defense:
7 - just because you can't "grapple" an object doesn't mean you can't grab, move, or carry an object. Whether this has any practical effect might have table variance.
multiclassing:
Several entries in this FAQ assert that casting spells as part of the attack action is not possible, but I'm assuming that was written before bladesinger was published.
But while a bladesinger can use cantrips as part of an attack action, it's important to note that booming blade and eldritch flame blade additionally require the target to be in the spell's range, which is not satisfied by the echo's features (after errata). You can combine trickery cleric's invoke duplicity to cast a spell from a different location (although this is way too convoluted to be worth it, IMO).
I don't know if this post is still active, but I have another question.
If an attack is made with the Echo, is it possible to use features that can activate when you hit an attack? So for example, could you activate the Goading Attack maneuver, with an attack that was made from the Echo? Or another example could be if you have multiclassed into paladin, would you be able to use Divine Smite with an attack made from the Echo?
I don't know if this post is still active, but I have another question.
If an attack is made with the Echo, is it possible to use features that can activate when you hit an attack? So for example, could you activate the Goading Attack maneuver, with an attack that was made from the Echo? Or another example could be if you have multiclassed into paladin, would you be able to use Divine Smite with an attack made from the Echo?
yes, because the echo isn't doing anything. It is *you* making the attack from where the echo is. the echo is just a door from which you can strike.
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!"
High level campaign I have a simulacrum and true polymorph. If I true polymorph my simulacrum into a draconic and it inhabits my Echo as it's an object. Will it gain the HP of the draconic shard. Be able to attack on its turn and fly etc? If this is the case what would happen when I am more than 30 feet away from the Echo? Does the draconic shard get shunted out?
Assuming the echo is an object (the rules do not state, and Crawford's tweet is unofficial)...
The echo's hit points are not increased; it still only has 1. Rather, the shard's hit points are consumed first.
The shard can use the echo to fly, something the shard can already can do, but it cannot use all of its actions. Multiattack, for example, is functionally prohibited because it's not included in the list of actions the shard can take while possessing an object. It can still use its legendary actions, and Telekinetic Rend would deal +1d8 force damage each time.
If the echo is more than 30 feet from the fighter as the fighter's turn ends, the echo ceases to exist. With nothing to possess, the shard is exposed.
The only advantage this idea can grant is a way for the fighter to teleport a slightly longer distance than usual. Technically, having the shard possess the echo would lower the echo's AC. It's intended to be expendable. That's why there's no limit to the number of times it can be conjured into existence.
The echo does not grant the shard any advantages, and the bonus to the fighter is miniscule. Is giving up two potential Telekinetic Rend attacks, via Multiattack, worth maybe +3d8 force damage and a slightly longer teleport every other turn?
Under Opportunity Attacks I think you meant to say only the last feature of sentinel applies, not the first.
No, the OP gives their reasons. The issue comes down to what your reach means. The OP interprets that as strictly being the fighter's space and reach, not the additional location of the echo.
It might be a conservative take, but it isn't wrong.
You can carry an object (like a sword) without a roll, and push an object (like a small chair) without a roll., using only an incidental action. This implies since you can't grapple or shove an echo, a creature could pick up and carry or knock aside freely an echo without a roll as an incidental action.
You can carry an object (like a sword) without a roll, and push an object (like a small chair) without a roll., using only an incidental action. This implies since you can't grapple or shove an echo, a creature could pick up and carry or knock aside freely an echo without a roll as an incidental action.
The echo isn't like a sword or a chair. Its a magical, intangible object. (If you're getting hung up on JCs tweet)
Intangible means you can't just pick it up, carry it, or knock it aside. Magic means you have to abide by what the feature says it does and how it works. The knight moves the echo with its mind. That is how its moved. The intent is for it to be attacked if another creature doesn't like where it is.
I dont use DDB or forums very much so forgive me if my formatting is a bit rough but I feel like I need a sanity check; My group is doing a no-holds-barred 17th level 3 shot for funsies and I was prepping a RAW quick reference sheet for my DM to use when making rulings around a bunch of stuff when I fell into this rabbit hole and came to a horrifying conclusion: I think the framework for interacting with the echo and the meaning behind the "...it occupies its space." may be that the echo is not an object or a creature, but simply a magical effect occupying a location.
As per "Making an attack":
Step 1 Choose a target. When making an attack, our options are to target a creature, an object or a location. As the echo is not stated to be a creature or an object, the only valid option is to target a location. As targeting an unoccupied location with an attack roll results in an automatic miss (See "Unseen Attackers and targets"), if the echo *didn't* say it occupied its space, we would literally have no way of targeting it with an attack roll by RAW (Weirdly enough, as far as I can tell there is no text that says what happens if you target a location, we only have the text of the "Unseen attackers and targets" section which states that "If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss..." which does seem to indicate that in targeting a location we also target an otherwise unqualified "target" within the target location against which the attack roll automatically fails. For the sake of everyone's sanity I'll assume we're all on board with having attack rolls made while targeting a location go against the AC of something of your choice that inhabits that location because otherwise our options for attacking hidden creatures and objects are to pick the wrong spot and miss or pick the right spot and have to house rule what happens next.)
With the understanding that specific vs general is the operating paradigm, this explains why we have the information we do. There are no general rules for attacking an effect so we're given a way to calculate its AC. There are no general rules for dealing damage to magical effects so we're told it has a hit point and is destroyed when it is depleted. We have no general rules for what happens when an effect is forced to make a save, so we are told it uses the saves of the knight (Probably in case someone tries to do something like use dispel magic on it as though it were animated armour, not RAW of course but it's nice to have some guidance when making rulings). We have no general rules for applying conditions to an effect so we are informed that it is immune to all conditions (No idea why this one is included tbh, no condition I've seen affects anything but creatures and even objects don't tend to say they're immune to conditions. All that this does is imply that if you make a spell that can charm a cart, the cart would be charmed but wouldn't give you any benefit.).
If taken like this, everything else becomes a fairly unambiguous in so far as RAW interactions go. Creatures can walk through it and stand in its space. You can even move it into an otherwise occupied space once it has been manifested. You can't select its space for things that require an unoccupied space such as misty step or guardian of faith (as a tangent, I've come to belive that guardian of faith occupying space also only means it simply blocks things that call for an unoccupied space). You can't grapple or shove it, nor push, pull, lift or drag it and it is not affected by difficult terrain as it is neither a character or a monster (it doesn't even have a speed!). You can't tie a rope to it, and walls pose no specific impediment to it. Without reading every spell, it's immune to just about anything that doesn't give you a blacket attack roll with no targeting requirements (such as magic stone) or things like antimagic field which specifies that it works against magical effects. Finally, the echo exists in a space so if you're on a grid map where the grid is relative to a moving object (such as a boat), the echo's space is relative to the moving object so it would keep pace. If you're doing theater of the mind, god help you because WotC won't.
To be clear, this is me going through and cross referencing every keyword I can find as best as I can (closing all these tabs will be *very* satisfying). If I've missed something, please let me know. I'd also love to see ya'lls take on this because it feels like a slam dunk to me.
In the Legion of One description, it never specified if when you use Unleash Incarnation you can attack from or both echos. Can some help to clarify this?
In the Legion of One description, it never specified if when you use Unleash Incarnation you can attack from or both echos. Can some help to clarify this?
Unleash Incarnation only gives you one additional attack.
Legion of One has a sentence reading as follows: "Anything you can do from one echo’s position can be done from the other’s instead."
You get only one additional attack, and you decide which echo it originates from.
What happens when a knight uses the echo to attack a black pudding?
Is the echo destroyed, or does the knight take damage?
I recently encountered this scenario as the knight, and we played it as the echo took the damage, but my weapon corroded. This ended with me destroying a weapon, and losing some attacks, as my echo vanished before I finished all of them.
Now I’m thinking I should have been taking the damage and getting all of my attacks, but I’m not certain.
What happens when a knight uses the echo to attack a black pudding? Is the echo destroyed, or does the knight take damage?
[snipped for space]
Now I’m thinking I should have been taking the damage and getting all of my attacks, but I’m not certain. Thoughts?
Since YOU (the knight) are making the attacks "from the echo's location", you (the knight) are taking the damage, not the echo. For the echo to take damage, it has to be targeted. If the black pudding caused area of effect damage, then it would harm the echo as well, but in this case, it is only the attacker that takes the damage.
What happens when a knight uses the echo to attack a black pudding?
Is the echo destroyed, or does the knight take damage?
I recently encountered this scenario as the knight, and we played it as the echo took the damage, but my weapon corroded. This ended with me destroying a weapon, and losing some attacks, as my echo vanished before I finished all of them.
Now I’m thinking I should have been taking the damage and getting all of my attacks, but I’m not certain.
Thoughts?
Let's look at the stat block for the black pudding; including the relevant section of its Corrosive Form feature.
Corrosive Form. A creature that touches the pudding or hits it with a melee attack while within 5 feet of it takes 4 (1d8) acid damage. Any nonmagical weapon made of metal or wood that hits the pudding corrodes. After dealing damage, the weapon takes a permanent and cumulative -1 penalty to damage rolls. If its penalty drops to -5, the weapon is destroyed.
Okay, so the first sentence it fairly clear: only creatures within 5 feet of the ooze take the acid damage. The echo knight can attack from within that space, but they aren't required to. According to Crawford, whose ruling is not official, the echo is a magical object and not a creature. The echo cannot take damage from attacking, and the echo knight does not need to be within 5 feet of the ooze.
So we move on to the weapon. The echo knight is attacking from the echo's position, and without anything saying the echo duplicates weapons and ammunition, I'm going to say the echo knight attacks with their weapon. So the weapon would still take damage.
Can you spawn an Echo inside a Forcecage? (Talking about the BOX variant, not the cage variant)
Forcecage:
A prison in the shape of a box can be up to 10 feet on a side, creating a solid barrier that prevents any matter from passing through it and blocking any spells cast into or out from the area.
Echo:
You can use a bonus action to magically manifest an echo of yourself in an unoccupied space you can see within 15 feet of you.
What happens when a knight uses the echo to attack a black pudding?
Is the echo destroyed, or does the knight take damage?
I recently encountered this scenario as the knight, and we played it as the echo took the damage, but my weapon corroded. This ended with me destroying a weapon, and losing some attacks, as my echo vanished before I finished all of them.
Now I’m thinking I should have been taking the damage and getting all of my attacks, but I’m not certain.
Thoughts?
Let's look at the stat block for the black pudding; including the relevant section of its Corrosive Form feature.
Corrosive Form. A creature that touches the pudding or hits it with a melee attack while within 5 feet of it takes 4 (1d8) acid damage. Any nonmagical weapon made of metal or wood that hits the pudding corrodes. After dealing damage, the weapon takes a permanent and cumulative -1 penalty to damage rolls. If its penalty drops to -5, the weapon is destroyed.
Okay, so the first sentence it fairly clear: only creatures within 5 feet of the ooze take the acid damage. The echo knight can attack from within that space, but they aren't required to. According to Crawford, whose ruling is not official, the echo is a magical object and not a creature. The echo cannot take damage from attacking, and the echo knight does not need to be within 5 feet of the ooze.
So we move on to the weapon. The echo knight is attacking from the echo's position, and without anything saying the echo duplicates weapons and ammunition, I'm going to say the echo knight attacks with their weapon. So the weapon would still take damage.
Per the written rule, the echo is not a creature at all. Nor is it making the attack, the echo knight is. Doesn't matter what Crawford says, the ability doesn't say it is a creature, so it is not. The echo additionally doesn't duplicate anything, it can't duplicate anything because nothing says it does, so yes, the echo knight's weapon (the one they are physically holding) would take the damage, because it is the echo knight making the attack.
Can you spawn an Echo inside a Forcecage? (Talking about the BOX variant, not the cage variant)
Forcecage:
A prison in the shape of a box can be up to 10 feet on a side, creating a solid barrier that prevents any matter from passing through it and blocking any spells cast into or out from the area.
Echo:
You can use a bonus action to magically manifest an echo of yourself in an unoccupied space you can see within 15 feet of you.
Yes, because the echo manifestation is not a spell nor is it physically moving across, so it can cross the boundary.
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!"
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Except the echo doesn't really look enough like you to fool anybody imo. The echo is a "magical, translucent, gray image of you!" So...unless you're normally gray and light passes through you, nobody will be fooled! ;)
The situation VahidHashemi presented will still work because it is not trying to make the observer think the echo is real. The echo is out of sight. The "real you" really does fall off the cliff and then, while falling, swaps places with the echo. (Assuming the viewer is not in a place to see the entirety of the fall.)
Thats like saying "This wizard in our group keeps casting these spells and these spells keep stopping the enemy or killing them, any way to stop the wizard from casting spells?" dude, thats what wizards do, and creating an echo is what Echo Knights do. Why would you possibly limit this? Just give the creature more than one attack, now it can kill the echo and attack another player, or it ignores the echo and goes after everyone else. Yes it will get an AO but it could miss and even if it doesn't most enemies don't die from one hit. Also, usually there's more than one enemy, so other enemies can attack them too. So many options other than changing the player's ability to use their core feature. I'm guessing you're very new to DMing but there are other options than nerfing a character and ultimately taking fun away from them.
Oh, neat, is this still being updated?
1 - Bravo. Several of the other question should just say see rule one, "The echo never attacks. The knight attacks from the echo's position.""
6 - technically correct, but it's the wrong question (see rule one). The knight gains the benefit of flanking if they are in that square.
10 - re: Haste, the general consensus on most sites is no. Although "some debate" will probably always be true, for what it's worth, unless we get an official ruling
12 - you can attack something you cannot see
13 - correct on cover, but see 12 for obscurement
4 - it's pretty clear that grapple and shove are attacks you take as part of the attack action. Shove works fine. However, a successful grapple would immediately be broken if the knight is out of reach, so it's kind of moot (unless you're cheesing a falling rule on flying creatures at an overly literal RAW table).
ranged:
1 - note that this is relevant for the "ranged attacks in close combat" rule
movement:
14 - I know you're making a joke, or future proofing, but one bonus action is a hard rule, currently
defense:
7 - just because you can't "grapple" an object doesn't mean you can't grab, move, or carry an object. Whether this has any practical effect might have table variance.
multiclassing:
Several entries in this FAQ assert that casting spells as part of the attack action is not possible, but I'm assuming that was written before bladesinger was published.
But while a bladesinger can use cantrips as part of an attack action, it's important to note that booming blade and eldritch flame blade additionally require the target to be in the spell's range, which is not satisfied by the echo's features (after errata). You can combine trickery cleric's invoke duplicity to cast a spell from a different location (although this is way too convoluted to be worth it, IMO).
I don't know if this post is still active, but I have another question.
If an attack is made with the Echo, is it possible to use features that can activate when you hit an attack? So for example, could you activate the Goading Attack maneuver, with an attack that was made from the Echo? Or another example could be if you have multiclassed into paladin, would you be able to use Divine Smite with an attack made from the Echo?
yes, because the echo isn't doing anything. It is *you* making the attack from where the echo is. the echo is just a door from which you can strike.
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!"
High level campaign I have a simulacrum and true polymorph. If I true polymorph my simulacrum into a draconic and it inhabits my Echo as it's an object. Will it gain the HP of the draconic shard. Be able to attack on its turn and fly etc? If this is the case what would happen when I am more than 30 feet away from the Echo? Does the draconic shard get shunted out?
Assuming the echo is an object (the rules do not state, and Crawford's tweet is unofficial)...
The only advantage this idea can grant is a way for the fighter to teleport a slightly longer distance than usual. Technically, having the shard possess the echo would lower the echo's AC. It's intended to be expendable. That's why there's no limit to the number of times it can be conjured into existence.
The echo does not grant the shard any advantages, and the bonus to the fighter is miniscule. Is giving up two potential Telekinetic Rend attacks, via Multiattack, worth maybe +3d8 force damage and a slightly longer teleport every other turn?
I don't think so.
Under Opportunity Attacks I think you meant to say only the last feature of sentinel applies, not the first.
No, the OP gives their reasons. The issue comes down to what your reach means. The OP interprets that as strictly being the fighter's space and reach, not the additional location of the echo.
It might be a conservative take, but it isn't wrong.
You can carry an object (like a sword) without a roll, and push an object (like a small chair) without a roll., using only an incidental action. This implies since you can't grapple or shove an echo, a creature could pick up and carry or knock aside freely an echo without a roll as an incidental action.
The echo isn't like a sword or a chair. Its a magical, intangible object. (If you're getting hung up on JCs tweet)
Intangible means you can't just pick it up, carry it, or knock it aside. Magic means you have to abide by what the feature says it does and how it works. The knight moves the echo with its mind. That is how its moved. The intent is for it to be attacked if another creature doesn't like where it is.
Hello everyone,
I dont use DDB or forums very much so forgive me if my formatting is a bit rough but I feel like I need a sanity check;
My group is doing a no-holds-barred 17th level 3 shot for funsies and I was prepping a RAW quick reference sheet for my DM to use when making rulings around a bunch of stuff when I fell into this rabbit hole and came to a horrifying conclusion: I think the framework for interacting with the echo and the meaning behind the "...it occupies its space." may be that the echo is not an object or a creature, but simply a magical effect occupying a location.
As per "Making an attack":
Step 1 Choose a target. When making an attack, our options are to target a creature, an object or a location. As the echo is not stated to be a creature or an object, the only valid option is to target a location. As targeting an unoccupied location with an attack roll results in an automatic miss (See "Unseen Attackers and targets"), if the echo *didn't* say it occupied its space, we would literally have no way of targeting it with an attack roll by RAW (Weirdly enough, as far as I can tell there is no text that says what happens if you target a location, we only have the text of the "Unseen attackers and targets" section which states that "If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss..." which does seem to indicate that in targeting a location we also target an otherwise unqualified "target" within the target location against which the attack roll automatically fails. For the sake of everyone's sanity I'll assume we're all on board with having attack rolls made while targeting a location go against the AC of something of your choice that inhabits that location because otherwise our options for attacking hidden creatures and objects are to pick the wrong spot and miss or pick the right spot and have to house rule what happens next.)
With the understanding that specific vs general is the operating paradigm, this explains why we have the information we do. There are no general rules for attacking an effect so we're given a way to calculate its AC. There are no general rules for dealing damage to magical effects so we're told it has a hit point and is destroyed when it is depleted. We have no general rules for what happens when an effect is forced to make a save, so we are told it uses the saves of the knight (Probably in case someone tries to do something like use dispel magic on it as though it were animated armour, not RAW of course but it's nice to have some guidance when making rulings). We have no general rules for applying conditions to an effect so we are informed that it is immune to all conditions (No idea why this one is included tbh, no condition I've seen affects anything but creatures and even objects don't tend to say they're immune to conditions. All that this does is imply that if you make a spell that can charm a cart, the cart would be charmed but wouldn't give you any benefit.).
If taken like this, everything else becomes a fairly unambiguous in so far as RAW interactions go. Creatures can walk through it and stand in its space. You can even move it into an otherwise occupied space once it has been manifested. You can't select its space for things that require an unoccupied space such as misty step or guardian of faith (as a tangent, I've come to belive that guardian of faith occupying space also only means it simply blocks things that call for an unoccupied space). You can't grapple or shove it, nor push, pull, lift or drag it and it is not affected by difficult terrain as it is neither a character or a monster (it doesn't even have a speed!). You can't tie a rope to it, and walls pose no specific impediment to it. Without reading every spell, it's immune to just about anything that doesn't give you a blacket attack roll with no targeting requirements (such as magic stone) or things like antimagic field which specifies that it works against magical effects. Finally, the echo exists in a space so if you're on a grid map where the grid is relative to a moving object (such as a boat), the echo's space is relative to the moving object so it would keep pace. If you're doing theater of the mind, god help you because WotC won't.
To be clear, this is me going through and cross referencing every keyword I can find as best as I can (closing all these tabs will be *very* satisfying). If I've missed something, please let me know. I'd also love to see ya'lls take on this because it feels like a slam dunk to me.
I have a question.
In the Legion of One description, it never specified if when you use Unleash Incarnation you can attack from or both echos. Can some help to clarify this?
Unleash Incarnation only gives you one additional attack.
Legion of One has a sentence reading as follows: "Anything you can do from one echo’s position can be done from the other’s instead."
You get only one additional attack, and you decide which echo it originates from.
What happens when a knight uses the echo to attack a black pudding?
Is the echo destroyed, or does the knight take damage?
I recently encountered this scenario as the knight, and we played it as the echo took the damage, but my weapon corroded. This ended with me destroying a weapon, and losing some attacks, as my echo vanished before I finished all of them.
Now I’m thinking I should have been taking the damage and getting all of my attacks, but I’m not certain.
Thoughts?
Since YOU (the knight) are making the attacks "from the echo's location", you (the knight) are taking the damage, not the echo. For the echo to take damage, it has to be targeted. If the black pudding caused area of effect damage, then it would harm the echo as well, but in this case, it is only the attacker that takes the damage.
Let's look at the stat block for the black pudding; including the relevant section of its Corrosive Form feature.
Okay, so the first sentence it fairly clear: only creatures within 5 feet of the ooze take the acid damage. The echo knight can attack from within that space, but they aren't required to. According to Crawford, whose ruling is not official, the echo is a magical object and not a creature. The echo cannot take damage from attacking, and the echo knight does not need to be within 5 feet of the ooze.
So we move on to the weapon. The echo knight is attacking from the echo's position, and without anything saying the echo duplicates weapons and ammunition, I'm going to say the echo knight attacks with their weapon. So the weapon would still take damage.
Can you spawn an Echo inside a Forcecage? (Talking about the BOX variant, not the cage variant)
Forcecage:
Echo:
Per the written rule, the echo is not a creature at all. Nor is it making the attack, the echo knight is. Doesn't matter what Crawford says, the ability doesn't say it is a creature, so it is not. The echo additionally doesn't duplicate anything, it can't duplicate anything because nothing says it does, so yes, the echo knight's weapon (the one they are physically holding) would take the damage, because it is the echo knight making the attack.
Yes, because the echo manifestation is not a spell nor is it physically moving across, so it can cross the boundary.
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!"