Q: Bonus Action Attacks? Can a knight perform the PAM BA through the echo? I presume that it cannot perform the OOA on a creature entering the echo's space.
Here is my take on the answer. Anyone have thoughts?
A: No, by RAW. An Echo Knight cannot use Manifest Echo to make an bonus action attack using Polearm Master through their Echo. Manifest Echo specifically states that only attacks made using the Attack action can be can be made from an Echo’s space.
Manifest Echo: “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 Polearm Master feat clearly grants a bonus action if an Attack action is made. But while the action is indeed a melee attack, a bonus actions is not part of the Attack action.
Polearm Master: "When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, or quarterstaff, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon.”
It's not immediately clear from reading the Manifest Echo and Echo Avatar that you could use Echo Avatar, move the Echo 30 feet every 6 seconds in ANY direction up to 1000 feet away, meaning that in this 10 minute window you see and hear through it's receptors and can move a grand total of 3000 feet if you don't stop moving the moment the ability triggers allowing a LOT of scouting in tall rooms/halls/areas AND at a whim you can swap places with it wherever it is, even if it's 1000 feet straight up
I think I covered teleporting to an Echo Avatar in the FAQ, but correct me if you think the answer is wrong.
Q: Can you teleport to an Echo that is 1000’ away using the Echo Avatar feature? A: No by RAI, a Knight cannot teleport while using an Echo Avatar. Jeremy Crawford tweeted, “The intent is that you can't do anything with the Echo Knight's echo while using Echo Avatar, other than scout with it. The text stating that intent is mysteriously missing from the book. We'll fix it in a future printing! Sorry about the confusion." Reference: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1242199682534608896
I’ve gathered the below additional questions from the thread so far. I’d love to get your thoughts on if these should be added to the main FAQ and/or your answers to any of the questions.
Q: Can a Knight use a bonus action attack gain through the Polearm Master, Great Weapon Mater, or Crossbow Expert feats to make an attack from their Echo’s Space? A: … (I took a stab at answering in a previous post (as have others), but I’m open to other ideas.)
Q: If an Echo is considered an object, can you paint it? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim) A: … (Maybe, there are no clear rules. It is up the DM to determine if the Echo is more like a solid “object" or a "translucent image", both of which are used to describe the Echo.)
Q: If the Knight grapples an opponent, and then swaps places with the Echo, does opponent teleport with them, or does the grapple end? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim) A: …
Q: If a Knight is jumping or falling, and swaps places with their Echo, do they maintain their velocity after they teleport? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim) A: … (Is there a precedent for this for any teleporting abilities?)
Q: Can you used Unleash Incarnation to make an extra attack after using Action surge? For example, using Action Surge, can a Knight make two full Attack Actions, and then make two Unleash Incarnation attacks? (thanks @Blayze9) A: … (I’m not sure the best way to phrase this question or if it is too edge case.)
Q: If an Echo Knight/Warlock using the invocation 'Mask of Many Faces’ manifested an Echo, would the Echo’s appearance be identical to the ‘Mask of Many Faces’ illusion, or to the Knight' normal appearance? What if the Echo Knight used the disguise skill? Or what if the Echo Knight was a changling in disguise? (thanks @Oniminikui) A: … (Would this answer to this primarily be DM dependent?)
Q: If a Knight changes appearance after manifesting an Echo, does the Echo’s appear also change? For example if the Knight changed appears because they are a Changling or used magic. (thanks @Oniminikui) A: … (Would this answer to this primarily be DM dependent?)
Q: Can an Echo appear as a different version of the Knight (perhaps from a different timeline), or are they identical to the Knight’s current appearance? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim) A: … (Would this answer to this primarily be DM dependent?)
As you could infer from my post, I'm starting a similar build. But with the twist of multiclassing it with Battle Smith Artificer. The best features of Echo Knight are unleash incarnation and the threat of using an opportunity attack. Therefore, the best way to use the echo knight might be to take advantage of these features by using a glaive or a greatsword and picking up GWM.
I was strongly, strongly considering using the repeating weapon infusion + xbow mastery to resolve the juggling conundrum. This combo allows you to equip a hand xbow and a longsword (or other melee one-handed weapon) without any need for weapon swapping. But the GWM build hits a lot harder and does not rely on bonus actions as much.
Sentinel would be fun too - not so much for the better chance to get an opportunity attack, but the threat of stopping your opponent cold with the Echo. This makes the echo much more of a nuisance then it might be otherwise.
From a build perspective, I do like the Great Weapon Master approach, though I am also a fan of ranged attacks and Crossbow Expert. Unfortunately I think CBE's bonus action would compete too much with the Manifest Echo abilities for my own personal preference. I think the best part about the Knight is being able to move around quickly, and I want to freedom to do so without sacrificing other abilities.
Though it would be a shame to miss out on the bonus action gained from GWM, it doesn't happen all that often. And alas, the bonus action also can't really be used through an Echo either.
I do debate going with Sentinel or GWM, both of which I think work well with the Echo Knight. I guess it depends what purpose you want your character to fill on the battlefield. But it is really Sentinel that an Echo Knight can uniquely take advantage of. Any fighter can use GWM.
The one build I am thinking most about is Barbarian 2/Echo Knight 3+. In this case I'd certain take GWM to take "advantage" of Reckless Attack (pun not intended), without worrying about the Echo getting hit in return.
I also love the idea of maybe taking Sharpshooter feat, the Archery fighting style, and a longbow with an Echo Knight build. I'm imagining a sharpshooter of sorts who hides and never reveals themselves, but just attacks from other locations using their Echo, all to confuse the enemy and stay hidden. Two levels in rogue here would be a boon as well, or even in combination with Skulker. Though this does bring up another interesting question.
Q: Does attacking from through an Echo reveal a Knight's position if hidden, or could it allow the Knight to remain hidden? I'm guessing by RAW you couldn't remain hidden (though I couldn't find the rule offhand), but this could very situation or DM dependent.
Q: Does attacking from through an Echo reveal a Knight's position if hidden, or could it allow the Knight to remain hidden? I'm guessing by RAW you couldn't remain hidden (though I couldn't find the rule offhand), but this could very situation or DM dependent.
Skulker lets you stay hidden, but only if you miss, so not much help overall :/
1. Can you look through a keyhole, manifest echo in the locked room. Next round teleport in? (appears so RAW, not RAI from description of alternative/split time lines, though flying knights also seems opposite to this)
2. What about through a closed window? (can see, so can summon, but there is a physical barrier?) seems to work
3. At early levels, if you lose sight of echo, what can it do? Eg we had a door close, echo on other side to knight. Assumed it couldn't do much!
4. Assume an illusion of a room, wouldn't allow summoning, but what about clairvoyance on other side of door? Seems to work if within range.
5. Objects can be used, moved, damaged. Why attack the object, just damage it and it pops.
These echos seem more and more like balloon knights!
Here's a couple of questions that I haven't found clear answers to:
If the Echo Knight is grappled by a creature, could the Echo Knight swap places with their Echo to escape the grapple?
RAW Assumption: No, because the Echo Knight's Speed is set to 0 because of the grappled and they don't have the "15 feet for movement" for the swap?
If the Echo Knight is hidden, and they make their attacks through their Echo, does the Echo Knight remain hidden?
RAW Assumption: No, because "Unseen Attackers and Targets" reads "...when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses."?
I could see DMs ruling otherwise in particular situations.
Does the Echo provide half cover (+2 AC) when directly between an attacker and a target?
Example: A creature is in a 5ft hallway, the Echo is standing in front of the creature, an ally with a bow is behind the Echo. Does the creature have half cover versus the ranged attack from the ally?
RAW Assumption: Yes, because the Echo "is the same size as you, and it occupies its space."
If an Echo is standing in a 5ft hallway, how can a creature who is not the Echo Knight move the Echo out of the way?
RAW Assumption: The same way the creature would move an inanimate object. The DM would need to adjudicate if this would cost an action or portion of movement
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.
This seems to imply that the echo will be destroyed even if it is only momentarily more than 30 feet away? The wording in the book (as I read it at least) I think means that it is only destroyed if you end your turn more than 30 feet away?
I think the placement of the comma is the key here, compare:
"If your echo is ever more than 30 feet from you at the end of your turn, it is destroyed." [As written in the book]
"If your echo is ever more than 30 feet from you, at the end of your turn it is destroyed." [Comma moved]
I want to push back on the "melee attack spell" limitation on the echo. pg 195 of the PHB says specifically "A few spells also involve making a melee attack".
I could infer that this means it is a two step process in that step 1 is casting the spell (which the echo can't do), and step 2 is making the melee attack once you are empowered with what the spell gave you (which the echo can do). I don't think this is OP because if you miss on the attack the spell is wasted. So for Vampiric touch as an example, which says specifically that you make a melee spell attack, I think it's a fair trade off in that it's an attack, but it doesn't get the benefit of hitting twice like a sword attack would based on fighter/echo knight extra attack, but it's an attack "option".
Is there any official word on this or is it ambiguous, since the PHB, Echo Knight and various touch spells (inflict wounds, vampiric touch, etc.) are all a bit vague? Or am I just not getting it?
"Fireball – interacts with objects, if and only if they're flammable. There have been no comments on whether or not the Echo is flammable, so I am assuming it isn't, as it is an "image." Holograms (even tangible ones from movies) don't tend to be flammable." The only reason an object wouldn't be flammable is if it were immune to fire damage or had a damage threshold? Or is there a rule somewhere that contradicts this? The echo has a specific set of resistances and immunities, and fire damage is not mentioned, nor does the echo have a damage threshold, which is the rule that protects larger structures from the weaker fireball, but not necessarily the stronger meteor swarm.
War Caster says "instead of making an opportunity attack, you can cast a spell" so spells cast using war caster are NOT attacks of opportunity, they are something you can do INSTEAD. The echo's rule "you can take an opportunity attack from the echo's space" doesn't mean "you can cast a spell from the echo's space". You can cast a spell from your own space, or take an opportunity attack from the echo's space... not both, was my interpretation.
This is an extremely well researched thread! Thanks all for making it!
But here’s my question: How did you infer the Echo is a solid object when it says it’s an “image”? Minor Illusion let’s you create an image that occupies a 5ft cube so isn’t this similar? I would like to know in case the situation comes up in game that I use it to block enemy movement.
This is an extremely well researched thread! Thanks all for making it!
But here’s my question: How did you infer the Echo is a solid object when it says it’s an “image”? Minor Illusion let’s you create an image that occupies a 5ft cube so isn’t this similar? I would like to know in case the situation comes up in game that I use it to block enemy movement.
Thanks. It is due to the help of many other people that this FAQ is presented. And I myself have been quite busy as of late. And still owe an update to the FAQ.
Echo's also occupy a space, which implies that there is something there that gets in the way of people moving through it, be it something solid or something magical that keeps things out.
That said, it is still "translucent" if you are following the description. And the term "image" is used in the description as well. Thus there is a contradiction here, and one that has led to a number of rules debates and much confusion. Given that, it is largely up to the GM to play it either way. But based on "official" sources, the best we can figure by the rules is that it is a solid enough object to block movement and be hit. What are your thoughts on how to rule it?
So the specific mention that it “occupies its space” is a curious phrase. On the one hand, that could simply mean the “image” is as big as the Knight that has summoned it. Which, under normal circumstances, would be a 5ft cube. If we use Minor Illusion as a point of comparison, the image is incorporeal. Thus, a person could walk right through it.
Where this gets tricky are the presence of an armor class and hit points. Some would argue that the mere presence of those alone would suggest the object is solid, or possesses some elements within that are solid. The counter to this are incorporeal creatures like ghosts or specters. These creatures can phase through objects and creatures, yet they have an AC and hit points. Some would point out that the Echo is not a creature, but the rules do not explicitly state if it’s incorporeal or not.
I would probably rule that it’s solid though because unlike MI this has a couple key differences: (1) It isn’t an illusion which by their very nature aren’t real. (2) The presence of AC and hit points indicates someone can interact with it. (eg: Attack it). Which isn’t really something you can do with an illusion accept under very, VERY specific circumstances (eg: you’re a high level illusionist wizard). And even within those circumstances they state that the illusion becomes real. Which segues into (3) Based in the description of the ability, the Echo is definitely something real.
To me, it seems more like a portal or a gateway that you can extend your reach through and use to teleport around the field. It just so happens the “portal” in this case is in the shape of the Echo Knight that summoned it. Some may state that it makes this more powerful than it should be as it allows the Echo Knight to grapple using it, but a grapple is an attack anyway, so I see no real problem with that.
To me, it seems more like a portal or a gateway that you can extend your reach through and use to teleport around the field. It just so happens the “portal” in this case is in the shape of the Echo Knight that summoned it. Some may state that it makes this more powerful than it should be as it allows the Echo Knight to grapple using it, but a grapple is an attack anyway, so I see no real problem with that.
Pretty good reasoning all around. You are not the first to mention the idea of the Echo as a ‘portal’. With that said, there is still an very unresolved debate around how grapple should work with an Echo, assuming you would allow it. Can it be maintained? Can it be used to drag something or someone? Your thoughts?
Pretty good reasoning all around. You are not the first to mention the idea of the Echo as a ‘portal’. With that said, there is still an very unresolved debate around how grapple should work with an Echo, assuming you would allow it. Can it be maintained? Can it be used to drag something or someone? Your thoughts?
Considering that a grapple is a type of attack and that the Echo Knight class description specifically states that the attack originates from the Echo's space, I would probably say that the Knight has to maintain the grapple via its Echo. So yes, I do believe that the grapple can be maintained provided that the Knight has a hand free to keep a hold of the target and the target meets the size limitations for the Knight to grapple them.
With respect to moving or dragging a grappled target, the problem is figuring out what actually bears the weight of the grappled target. Is it the Knight or the Echo? As a result, there are three possible ways to adjudicate this. The most obvious is to simply not allow it at all. But that doesn't really foster much of a discussion.
One method of handling this is to allow the Knight to move their Echo, but it is now subject to the movement speed rules pursuant to grappling (eg: The Echo can be moved up to 15 ft while the Knight is grappling an opponent from the Echo's space). Personally, I think this is fair, considering that as I stated before, the Echo is a real object and now it's dragging a real weight. If the Knight should swap places with their Echo before ending the grapple, the Knight is now maintaining the grapple as though they had initiated it originally and all of the normal rules for grappling apply.
An alternative to this approach might be to say that the Echo can still be moved up to 30 ft by the Knight, but now the Knight moves at half speed while maintaining the grapple (ie: the Knight and not the Echo is dragging the weight) and that the target would move in the same direction as the Knight. Attempting to grapple another target would end the first grapple, as a creature can only grapple one target at a time. This situation would be akin to a telekineticist concentrating on lifting a weight with their mind.
As usual, the Knight can end the grapple early if they desire as a free action and any contested checks would utilize the Knight's Athletics Skill vs. the grappled target's Athletics or Acrobatics.
@Vii007, I think you hit upon something important, which is that there really are not clear rules for grappling with an Echo. But to you point, let’s continue the thought exercise. I liked what other and you said earlier, and tend to agree with the description of the Echo as a portal for the Knight. Assuming it is just a portal, how would that impact the grapple rules?
For one, it is the Knight then doing the grappling, and not the Echo per sa. Thus it is the Knight who must maintain the grapple, and must have the free hand to do so. As you said.
So if the “portal” moves, what happens? Technically an Echo does not have a movement speed, and it is not a creature. So would the distance it can move be reduced because of the grapple? Can your portal just move vertically 30’ (or 15’) with the grappled creature it tow? If so, that might be quite powerful. And if it is really the knight maintaining the grapple, the knight would also have to be quite strong to maintain the grapple and effectively lift/carry the weight of the grappled creature as it is being lifted off the ground. I would be hesitant to allow the portal/Echo to move with additional rules because it simply gets complicated.
And if the Knight moves while grappling, what happens? I don’t know that the Knight moving would have any impact on the portal/Echo or the target of the grapple. The whole point of the Echo is that the Knight can be anywhere and still attack through it. But is some ways that could be cool for the Knight. Imagine if the Knight could maintain the grapple, but move freely, so long as the Echo and the grapple target don’t move. (I’m imagining in my head the Knight’s hands extending into ether and through the Echo.) But this would also mean that the target of the grapple couldn’t be moved by the Echo or Knight, unless the Knight swaps places and appears next to the grappled target.
The last option is as you said, perhaps the Knight and Echo move together. But now you are introducing new rules.
Thus I’d be inclined to say you can grapple through the Echo/portal, but if you can’t use it to move the target creature.
Though this introduces another problem. Can an Echo pick up or carry and object? Current it can’t by RAW, but if you can grapple a creature, couldn’t you also grapple (or grab) an object? Simply by the fact that a Echo aren’t meant to interact with objects (or at least there is no rule allowing it), this could be extended to imply that you won’t be able to grapple either. However this contradicts that grappling is an attack action and attacks are allowed. Ugh.
At least you can shove with an Echo, right? Perhaps the best way to go is simply to say the Echo or “portal” allow momentary attacks, but not something maintained.
You raise several interesting points. I might say the Knight can grapple an object/creature via their Echo, but it’s not in your hand. Moreover, perhaps to make it easier to adjudicate, you can’t move the grappled object if you move the Echo or if you move. The object is “grappled in place” or “pinned” if you will.
If a creature tried to grab the object in question, it would initiate a contest where if the creature wins they grab the object. If the Knight wins the object remains pinned.
After some consideration, allowing an object or grappled creature to move with the Knight or the Echo may be too powerful and doesn’t seem like RAI. If you allow this, you’re giving a PC access to an ability akin to Telekinesis at level 3.
Firstly, thank you so much to @The_Humble_Giant for this compilation. I have recently joined a 5e campaign after a 15+ year hiatus (raising special needs kids = No Free Time!) (plus I wasn't a fan of 4e). I just reached 3rd level and I am excited to see what I can do with my new Echo Knight abilities. I'm not sure if this is the place to ask, but how would you rule on a player positioning an Echo above an opponent, then swapping places? Could the Knight be prepared for the fall and have some advantage in the ensuing grapple? Would it be a grapple? Or could the Knight cause damage? 200lbs of armor and weapons dropping from some height? I think there are plenty of more easily adjudicated actions available, so I can avoid this if necessary, but I'm curious what you guys would think. (@LeviRocks, please weigh in as well. I've found your opinions on EK very helpful in cutting through so many wrong opinions.) Thanks guys!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Here is my take on the answer. Anyone have thoughts?
A: No, by RAW. An Echo Knight cannot use Manifest Echo to make an bonus action attack using Polearm Master through their Echo.
Manifest Echo specifically states that only attacks made using the Attack action can be can be made from an Echo’s space.
The Polearm Master feat clearly grants a bonus action if an Attack action is made. But while the action is indeed a melee attack, a bonus actions is not part of the Attack action.
Whether this is RAI is unclear at this time.
I think I covered teleporting to an Echo Avatar in the FAQ, but correct me if you think the answer is wrong.
Q: Can you teleport to an Echo that is 1000’ away using the Echo Avatar feature?
A: No by RAI, a Knight cannot teleport while using an Echo Avatar.
Jeremy Crawford tweeted, “The intent is that you can't do anything with the Echo Knight's echo while using Echo Avatar, other than scout with it. The text stating that intent is mysteriously missing from the book. We'll fix it in a future printing! Sorry about the confusion."
Reference: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1242199682534608896
Hi all,
I’ve gathered the below additional questions from the thread so far. I’d love to get your thoughts on if these should be added to the main FAQ and/or your answers to any of the questions.
Q: Can a Knight use a bonus action attack gain through the Polearm Master, Great Weapon Mater, or Crossbow Expert feats to make an attack from their Echo’s Space?
A: …
(I took a stab at answering in a previous post (as have others), but I’m open to other ideas.)
Q: If an Echo is considered an object, can you paint it? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim)
A: …
(Maybe, there are no clear rules. It is up the DM to determine if the Echo is more like a solid “object" or a "translucent image", both of which are used to describe the Echo.)
Q: If the Knight grapples an opponent, and then swaps places with the Echo, does opponent teleport with them, or does the grapple end? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim)
A: …
Q: If a Knight is jumping or falling, and swaps places with their Echo, do they maintain their velocity after they teleport? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim)
A: …
(Is there a precedent for this for any teleporting abilities?)
Q: Can you used Unleash Incarnation to make an extra attack after using Action surge? For example, using Action Surge, can a Knight make two full Attack Actions, and then make two Unleash Incarnation attacks? (thanks @Blayze9)
A: …
(I’m not sure the best way to phrase this question or if it is too edge case.)
Q: If an Echo Knight/Warlock using the invocation 'Mask of Many Faces’ manifested an Echo, would the Echo’s appearance be identical to the ‘Mask of Many Faces’ illusion, or to the Knight' normal appearance? What if the Echo Knight used the disguise skill? Or what if the Echo Knight was a changling in disguise? (thanks @Oniminikui)
A: …
(Would this answer to this primarily be DM dependent?)
Q: If a Knight changes appearance after manifesting an Echo, does the Echo’s appear also change? For example if the Knight changed appears because they are a Changling or used magic. (thanks @Oniminikui)
A: …
(Would this answer to this primarily be DM dependent?)
Q: Can an Echo appear as a different version of the Knight (perhaps from a different timeline), or are they identical to the Knight’s current appearance? (thanks @Wolfe_Grim)
A: …
(Would this answer to this primarily be DM dependent?)
Many thanks.
From a build perspective, I do like the Great Weapon Master approach, though I am also a fan of ranged attacks and Crossbow Expert. Unfortunately I think CBE's bonus action would compete too much with the Manifest Echo abilities for my own personal preference. I think the best part about the Knight is being able to move around quickly, and I want to freedom to do so without sacrificing other abilities.
Though it would be a shame to miss out on the bonus action gained from GWM, it doesn't happen all that often. And alas, the bonus action also can't really be used through an Echo either.
I do debate going with Sentinel or GWM, both of which I think work well with the Echo Knight. I guess it depends what purpose you want your character to fill on the battlefield. But it is really Sentinel that an Echo Knight can uniquely take advantage of. Any fighter can use GWM.
The one build I am thinking most about is Barbarian 2/Echo Knight 3+. In this case I'd certain take GWM to take "advantage" of Reckless Attack (pun not intended), without worrying about the Echo getting hit in return.
I also love the idea of maybe taking Sharpshooter feat, the Archery fighting style, and a longbow with an Echo Knight build. I'm imagining a sharpshooter of sorts who hides and never reveals themselves, but just attacks from other locations using their Echo, all to confuse the enemy and stay hidden. Two levels in rogue here would be a boon as well, or even in combination with Skulker. Though this does bring up another interesting question.
Q: Does attacking from through an Echo reveal a Knight's position if hidden, or could it allow the Knight to remain hidden? I'm guessing by RAW you couldn't remain hidden (though I couldn't find the rule offhand), but this could very situation or DM dependent.
Skulker lets you stay hidden, but only if you miss, so not much help overall :/
A couple that came up in our game
1. Can you look through a keyhole, manifest echo in the locked room. Next round teleport in? (appears so RAW, not RAI from description of alternative/split time lines, though flying knights also seems opposite to this)
2. What about through a closed window? (can see, so can summon, but there is a physical barrier?) seems to work
3. At early levels, if you lose sight of echo, what can it do? Eg we had a door close, echo on other side to knight. Assumed it couldn't do much!
4. Assume an illusion of a room, wouldn't allow summoning, but what about clairvoyance on other side of door? Seems to work if within range.
5. Objects can be used, moved, damaged. Why attack the object, just damage it and it pops.
These echos seem more and more like balloon knights!
Great post! Thanks for compiling this.
Here's a couple of questions that I haven't found clear answers to:
This seems to imply that the echo will be destroyed even if it is only momentarily more than 30 feet away? The wording in the book (as I read it at least) I think means that it is only destroyed if you end your turn more than 30 feet away?
I think the placement of the comma is the key here, compare:
I want to push back on the "melee attack spell" limitation on the echo. pg 195 of the PHB says specifically "A few spells also involve making a melee attack".
I could infer that this means it is a two step process in that step 1 is casting the spell (which the echo can't do), and step 2 is making the melee attack once you are empowered with what the spell gave you (which the echo can do). I don't think this is OP because if you miss on the attack the spell is wasted. So for Vampiric touch as an example, which says specifically that you make a melee spell attack, I think it's a fair trade off in that it's an attack, but it doesn't get the benefit of hitting twice like a sword attack would based on fighter/echo knight extra attack, but it's an attack "option".
Is there any official word on this or is it ambiguous, since the PHB, Echo Knight and various touch spells (inflict wounds, vampiric touch, etc.) are all a bit vague? Or am I just not getting it?
hi. i need the help of the greater mind.
when is the time of the Unleash Incarnation? can i attack, move and use the ability?
"Fireball – interacts with objects, if and only if they're flammable. There have been no comments on whether or not the Echo is flammable, so I am assuming it isn't, as it is an "image." Holograms (even tangible ones from movies) don't tend to be flammable."
The only reason an object wouldn't be flammable is if it were immune to fire damage or had a damage threshold? Or is there a rule somewhere that contradicts this? The echo has a specific set of resistances and immunities, and fire damage is not mentioned, nor does the echo have a damage threshold, which is the rule that protects larger structures from the weaker fireball, but not necessarily the stronger meteor swarm.
War Caster says "instead of making an opportunity attack, you can cast a spell" so spells cast using war caster are NOT attacks of opportunity, they are something you can do INSTEAD. The echo's rule "you can take an opportunity attack from the echo's space" doesn't mean "you can cast a spell from the echo's space". You can cast a spell from your own space, or take an opportunity attack from the echo's space... not both, was my interpretation.
This is an extremely well researched thread! Thanks all for making it!
But here’s my question: How did you infer the Echo is a solid object when it says it’s an “image”? Minor Illusion let’s you create an image that occupies a 5ft cube so isn’t this similar? I would like to know in case the situation comes up in game that I use it to block enemy movement.
Thanks. It is due to the help of many other people that this FAQ is presented. And I myself have been quite busy as of late. And still owe an update to the FAQ.
Regarding the question about Echo being considered an object, Jeremy Crewford made it clear in a couple tweets that the Echo is in fact an "object".
Reference: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1240669629661380609
Reference: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1240664419161399297
Echo's also occupy a space, which implies that there is something there that gets in the way of people moving through it, be it something solid or something magical that keeps things out.
That said, it is still "translucent" if you are following the description. And the term "image" is used in the description as well. Thus there is a contradiction here, and one that has led to a number of rules debates and much confusion. Given that, it is largely up to the GM to play it either way. But based on "official" sources, the best we can figure by the rules is that it is a solid enough object to block movement and be hit. What are your thoughts on how to rule it?
So the specific mention that it “occupies its space” is a curious phrase. On the one hand, that could simply mean the “image” is as big as the Knight that has summoned it. Which, under normal circumstances, would be a 5ft cube. If we use Minor Illusion as a point of comparison, the image is incorporeal. Thus, a person could walk right through it.
Where this gets tricky are the presence of an armor class and hit points. Some would argue that the mere presence of those alone would suggest the object is solid, or possesses some elements within that are solid. The counter to this are incorporeal creatures like ghosts or specters. These creatures can phase through objects and creatures, yet they have an AC and hit points. Some would point out that the Echo is not a creature, but the rules do not explicitly state if it’s incorporeal or not.
I would probably rule that it’s solid though because unlike MI this has a couple key differences: (1) It isn’t an illusion which by their very nature aren’t real. (2) The presence of AC and hit points indicates someone can interact with it. (eg: Attack it). Which isn’t really something you can do with an illusion accept under very, VERY specific circumstances (eg: you’re a high level illusionist wizard). And even within those circumstances they state that the illusion becomes real. Which segues into (3) Based in the description of the ability, the Echo is definitely something real.
To me, it seems more like a portal or a gateway that you can extend your reach through and use to teleport around the field. It just so happens the “portal” in this case is in the shape of the Echo Knight that summoned it. Some may state that it makes this more powerful than it should be as it allows the Echo Knight to grapple using it, but a grapple is an attack anyway, so I see no real problem with that.
Pretty good reasoning all around. You are not the first to mention the idea of the Echo as a ‘portal’. With that said, there is still an very unresolved debate around how grapple should work with an Echo, assuming you would allow it. Can it be maintained? Can it be used to drag something or someone? Your thoughts?
Considering that a grapple is a type of attack and that the Echo Knight class description specifically states that the attack originates from the Echo's space, I would probably say that the Knight has to maintain the grapple via its Echo. So yes, I do believe that the grapple can be maintained provided that the Knight has a hand free to keep a hold of the target and the target meets the size limitations for the Knight to grapple them.
With respect to moving or dragging a grappled target, the problem is figuring out what actually bears the weight of the grappled target. Is it the Knight or the Echo? As a result, there are three possible ways to adjudicate this. The most obvious is to simply not allow it at all. But that doesn't really foster much of a discussion.
One method of handling this is to allow the Knight to move their Echo, but it is now subject to the movement speed rules pursuant to grappling (eg: The Echo can be moved up to 15 ft while the Knight is grappling an opponent from the Echo's space). Personally, I think this is fair, considering that as I stated before, the Echo is a real object and now it's dragging a real weight. If the Knight should swap places with their Echo before ending the grapple, the Knight is now maintaining the grapple as though they had initiated it originally and all of the normal rules for grappling apply.
An alternative to this approach might be to say that the Echo can still be moved up to 30 ft by the Knight, but now the Knight moves at half speed while maintaining the grapple (ie: the Knight and not the Echo is dragging the weight) and that the target would move in the same direction as the Knight. Attempting to grapple another target would end the first grapple, as a creature can only grapple one target at a time. This situation would be akin to a telekineticist concentrating on lifting a weight with their mind.
As usual, the Knight can end the grapple early if they desire as a free action and any contested checks would utilize the Knight's Athletics Skill vs. the grappled target's Athletics or Acrobatics.
@Vii007, I think you hit upon something important, which is that there really are not clear rules for grappling with an Echo. But to you point, let’s continue the thought exercise. I liked what other and you said earlier, and tend to agree with the description of the Echo as a portal for the Knight. Assuming it is just a portal, how would that impact the grapple rules?
For one, it is the Knight then doing the grappling, and not the Echo per sa. Thus it is the Knight who must maintain the grapple, and must have the free hand to do so. As you said.
So if the “portal” moves, what happens? Technically an Echo does not have a movement speed, and it is not a creature. So would the distance it can move be reduced because of the grapple? Can your portal just move vertically 30’ (or 15’) with the grappled creature it tow? If so, that might be quite powerful. And if it is really the knight maintaining the grapple, the knight would also have to be quite strong to maintain the grapple and effectively lift/carry the weight of the grappled creature as it is being lifted off the ground. I would be hesitant to allow the portal/Echo to move with additional rules because it simply gets complicated.
And if the Knight moves while grappling, what happens? I don’t know that the Knight moving would have any impact on the portal/Echo or the target of the grapple. The whole point of the Echo is that the Knight can be anywhere and still attack through it. But is some ways that could be cool for the Knight. Imagine if the Knight could maintain the grapple, but move freely, so long as the Echo and the grapple target don’t move. (I’m imagining in my head the Knight’s hands extending into ether and through the Echo.) But this would also mean that the target of the grapple couldn’t be moved by the Echo or Knight, unless the Knight swaps places and appears next to the grappled target.
The last option is as you said, perhaps the Knight and Echo move together. But now you are introducing new rules.
Thus I’d be inclined to say you can grapple through the Echo/portal, but if you can’t use it to move the target creature.
Though this introduces another problem. Can an Echo pick up or carry and object? Current it can’t by RAW, but if you can grapple a creature, couldn’t you also grapple (or grab) an object? Simply by the fact that a Echo aren’t meant to interact with objects (or at least there is no rule allowing it), this could be extended to imply that you won’t be able to grapple either. However this contradicts that grappling is an attack action and attacks are allowed. Ugh.
At least you can shove with an Echo, right? Perhaps the best way to go is simply to say the Echo or “portal” allow momentary attacks, but not something maintained.
Thoughts?
This is how I image echos working in my game.
https://www.gif-vif.com/gifs/Damn-man/?fbrefresh=23
A fixed form when the echo was made, until its used to attack (so performs the attack and then pauses at the end)
Also as its an object, people can just walk past it, so squeezing rules to get past (for anyone) - depends on the size of the character.
Can also be a stepping stone for two long jumps to cross chasms and rivers?
You raise several interesting points. I might say the Knight can grapple an object/creature via their Echo, but it’s not in your hand. Moreover, perhaps to make it easier to adjudicate, you can’t move the grappled object if you move the Echo or if you move. The object is “grappled in place” or “pinned” if you will.
If a creature tried to grab the object in question, it would initiate a contest where if the creature wins they grab the object. If the Knight wins the object remains pinned.
After some consideration, allowing an object or grappled creature to move with the Knight or the Echo may be too powerful and doesn’t seem like RAI. If you allow this, you’re giving a PC access to an ability akin to Telekinesis at level 3.
Firstly, thank you so much to @The_Humble_Giant for this compilation. I have recently joined a 5e campaign after a 15+ year hiatus (raising special needs kids = No Free Time!) (plus I wasn't a fan of 4e). I just reached 3rd level and I am excited to see what I can do with my new Echo Knight abilities. I'm not sure if this is the place to ask, but how would you rule on a player positioning an Echo above an opponent, then swapping places? Could the Knight be prepared for the fall and have some advantage in the ensuing grapple? Would it be a grapple? Or could the Knight cause damage? 200lbs of armor and weapons dropping from some height? I think there are plenty of more easily adjudicated actions available, so I can avoid this if necessary, but I'm curious what you guys would think. (@LeviRocks, please weigh in as well. I've found your opinions on EK very helpful in cutting through so many wrong opinions.) Thanks guys!