If you want explict, let's look at the Great Old One: ...unspeakable being from the Far Realm or an elder god...
You go ahead and do you as well. I think that by omission and explictly saying so for GOO, that gods are now on the menu if you want.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I believe 2014 does a better job of showing the intention of what is and is not a valid warlock patron but does have the conflict of both saying that Warlock Patrons aren't gods but having GOO say Elder Gods. So this either means that Elder Gods are considered as something different to gods or there is another caveat going and I believe that was also described well in 2014.
A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods. A warlock might lead a cult dedicated to a demon prince, an archdevil, or an utterly alien entity — beings not typically served by clerics.
It makes no sense on the part of a Deity, that if they can have clerics serving them that they would also spend the time to personally deal with warlocks, instead of just making them become clerics too. An Elder God of the Far Realm likely has little to no power within the Mortal Plane or Outer Planes and thus has no clerics serving them, as such to try and extend their influence into those planes, they would have to engage with Warlocks and Cults.
Now beings that can serve as gods might also have underlings that might serve as Warlock Patrons, Hexblade is a great example of this, some of the more notable Hexblade Patrons were created by the Raven Queen, the Raven Queen isn't going to deal with Warlocks directly but could indirectly via a proxy such as a Hexblade.
Of course a DM at table can run it how they want but this is how I believe this is the most likely intention of what makes a valid Warlock Patron, and it's basically any powerful entity that does not have clerics serving them (at least in the targeted realm), looking to spread their influence.
Now, if somebody has a pact and then that god somehow manages to get enough influence or the warlock travels to a plane/realm where that god has influence, that warlock would remain a warlock as the pact in question would still remain in effect despite being somewhere that, that god has clerics.
and 2014 is gone. 2024 has arrived. Have a blessed day.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
and 2014 is gone. 2024 has arrived. Have a blessed day.
And, again, 2024 still has not given a single example of a deity as a Patron. Thus, common sense indicates that they intend the trend started in 2014 to continue in official material. If you want to do it differently that’s your prerogative, but the closest mention of deities as the term applies to 5e is “elder gods”, and I don’t recall seeing Cthulhu or Nyarlhotep or Shoggoth or any other Lovecraftian names listed in any tables of gods for a setting.
Drawing on the ancient knowledge of beings such as angels, archfey, demons, devils, hags, and alien entities of the Far Realm, Warlocks piece together arcane secrets to bolster their own power.
Gods aren't listed as a type of Patron, however Elder Gods from the Far Realm would still be valid as warlock patrons since they are entities of the Far Realm. However Elder Gods of the Far Realm would not have clerics, they are of the Far Realm, not the Prime Material Plane or Outer Realms. So it's really not invalidated anything, just 2014 describes things better than 2024 does in regards to this.
Now beings that can serve as gods might also have underlings that might serve as Warlock Patrons, Hexblade is a great example of this, some of the more notable Hexblade Patrons were created by the Raven Queen, the Raven Queen isn't going to deal with Warlocks directly but could indirectly via a proxy such as a Hexblade.
I do not know where Raven Queen has been officially listed as a Patron?
I know there was a UA for Raven Queen as a Patron but it never reached official release, most likely due to the existence of Hexblade, which shifts the Patron from The Raven Queen herself to servants acting as Patrons.
Something I already covered previously by instead suggesting Myrkul, whom as a god has Lich servants and Lich Priests/Clerics which would serve as Undead Patrons quiet nicely while allowing the character to be a devout follower of Myrkul. Which works in the same vein as the Raven Queen and Hexblade patrons that act beneath her.
Now beings that can serve as gods might also have underlings that might serve as Warlock Patrons, Hexblade is a great example of this, some of the more notable Hexblade Patrons were created by the Raven Queen, the Raven Queen isn't going to deal with Warlocks directly but could indirectly via a proxy such as a Hexblade.
I do not know where Raven Queen has been officially listed as a Patron?
I know there was a UA for Raven Queen as a Patron but it never reached official release, most likely due to the existence of Hexblade, which shifts the Patron from The Raven Queen herself to servants acting as Patrons.
Something I already covered previously by instead suggesting Myrkul, whom as a god has Lich servants and Lich Priests/Clerics which would serve as Undead Patrons quiet nicely while allowing the character to be a devout follower of Myrkul. Which works in the same vein as the Raven Queen and Hexblade patrons that act beneath her.
Because the Raven Queen is known to have forged the first of these weapons, many sages speculate that she and the force are one....
The “speculate” part is fairly operative in that quote as well. It’s one small and non-assertive blip in the trend. Again, not gonna insist everyone must not use gods as patrons, but none are listed for Celestial, none are listed for Undead when Vecna would probably be a more well known uber lich than Acererak, and Hexblade is noncommittal on the matter. It’s a clear trend in the lore.
Although probably a moot point given the age of the thread, I'll dip into earlier editions for inspiration should anyone want it:
Hoar aka: The Doombringer, The Poet of Justice, Lord of Three Thunders and Hurler of Thunder. Portfolio of powers: Revenge, Poetic Justice and Retribution. Alignment (if you use it): Lawful Neutral but worshippers alignments ran: LG, LN, LE, NG, NN, NE. In the old hierarchies of godly power Hoar was a Demi-power and dwelt on Mechanus and back in ad&d days he had a priesthood that could cast a spell to create a Revenenant. So you could port Hoar over to 5e and he could be the power behind a warlock, wherein you use the warlock class and possibly reborn race as a version of a revenant character. This might be some sort of punishment or maybe some quest Hoar has bestowed upon the PC for past mis-deeds.
Jergal aka: Lord of the End of Everything, Scribe of the Doomed, The Forgotten One, The Seneschal of the Crystal Spire, The Pitiless One. Portfolio of powers: Fatalism, Order in Death, Proper Burial, Guardian of Tombs, Protector of the Names of the Dead. Alignment (if you use it): Lawful Neutral but worshippers alignments ran: LG, LN, LE, NG, NN, NE. In the old hierarchies of godly power Jergal was a Demi-power and dwelt in the Gray Wastes. He worked with Kelemvor (the actual god of the dead) and Jergal could assume the form of any undead and gain all their respective abilities. To quote form the ad&d dogma for his religion: "Undeath is not an escape or a reward, it is simply a duty of the chosen few who worship the Lord of the End of Everything", so in this regard an undead or undying warlock may arise with Jergal as a patron and be task with collecting the names of the dead which might be rather fitting for a pact of tome warlock, interestingly in the blurb for Jergal it says when he appeared in avatar form he wouldn't wield a weapon so pact of blade warlocks would be rather rare.
Velshroon aka: The Vaunted, The Archmage of Necromancy, the Necromancer, The Lord of the Forsaken Crypt, Lord of the Forgotten Crypt, the Lich-Lord, Patron of Evil Liches. POrtfolio of powers; Necromancy, Necromancers, Lichdom, Evil Liches, Undeath. Alignment (if you use it): Neutral Evil but worshippers alignments ran: LN, LE, NN, NE, CN, CE. In the old hierarchies of godly power Velshroon was a Demi-power and dwelt on Gehenna. He's a god of necromancy...safe to say if he wants you to be an undead warlock he could do it whether your PC was willing or not.
These are the three I can be bothered to delve into at present, I'll fiinsh by saying the Gods were fleshed out to a much greater degree in ad&d and each had a type of cleric called a "speciality priest" affiliated with them, they came with all manner of special abilities and powers, so you could port the notion of a speciality priest over to 5e and use warlock to represent it.
I like how everyone just ignores the Raven Queen who has been listed as officially both a god and patron
Small point of order:
The Raven Queen is the Deity of Death in the generic D&D setting, but in the Forgotten Realms setting, the Realm of Death has a small pantheon: Kelemvor, as the Impartial Judge of the Dead, Bhaal as the Lord of Murder, Myrkul as the Hand of Death and Jergal as the Scribe of the Dead. Jergal, in particular, has an infinite supply of 'Book Mummies'. Jergal records the events of a deceased person's life on the pages of a 'Book Mummy'. When the pages of a 'Book Mummy' are filled up, that 'Book Mummy' closes up and shuffles off to a shadowy archive and a new 'Book Mummy' takes its place.
I believe 2014 does a better job of showing the intention of what is and is not a valid warlock patron but does have the conflict of both saying that Warlock Patrons aren't gods but having GOO say Elder Gods. So this either means that Elder Gods are considered as something different to gods or there is another caveat going and I believe that was also described well in 2014.
A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods. A warlock might lead a cult dedicated to a demon prince, an archdevil, or an utterly alien entity — beings not typically served by clerics.
It makes no sense on the part of a Deity, that if they can have clerics serving them that they would also spend the time to personally deal with warlocks, instead of just making them become clerics too.
1) "Not typically served by Clerics" means that having Clerics isn't impossible for some of these entities.
2) I think it's a bit unimaginative to say it "makes no sense." We don't have a concrete or definitive idea of what a given entity might get out of being a patron or a deity, so being both could easily be worth it for some.
Another example of an entity who could qualify as both is Asmodeus - he's listed as a deity in both the DMG and Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, and as a warlock patron in the PHB.
I believe 2014 does a better job of showing the intention of what is and is not a valid warlock patron but does have the conflict of both saying that Warlock Patrons aren't gods but having GOO say Elder Gods. So this either means that Elder Gods are considered as something different to gods or there is another caveat going and I believe that was also described well in 2014.
A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods. A warlock might lead a cult dedicated to a demon prince, an archdevil, or an utterly alien entity — beings not typically served by clerics.
It makes no sense on the part of a Deity, that if they can have clerics serving them that they would also spend the time to personally deal with warlocks, instead of just making them become clerics too.
1) "Not typically served by Clerics" means that having Clerics isn't impossible for some of these entities.
2) I think it's a bit unimaginative to say it "makes no sense." We don't have a concrete or definitive idea of what a given entity might get out of being a patron or a deity, so being both could easily be worth it for some.
Another example of an entity who could qualify as both is Asmodeus - he's listed as a deity in both the DMG and Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, and as a warlock patron in the PHB.
Asmodeus is a more interesting one, since most people would probably be adverse to open worship of Asmodeus. And while we do not have a concrete or definitive idea, there should at least be a reason. More so, most gods that do have Clerics, if they had somebody they really wanted serving them then they could also have them as their "chosen", which is not something a player would normally ever be but something that does exist in lore.
With Asmodeus, since open worship of him is probably quiet a restricted set, his influence may not be as great as other deities and so still deals with Warlocks, altho in the case of Asmodeus it does seem odd that he himself would still be directly dealing with warlocks given how many Devils serves under him that could just do the job for him, instead Asmodeus seems to have some want of converting all Tieflings to being related too him, there is also the Toril Thirteen... too much lore to go over there. Needless to say a lot of gods also ascended to godhood and might have some connections to whom they were before ascension, so it could be a throwback for Asmodeus that he still takes Warlocks despite not needing them anymore.
Needless to say a lot of gods also ascended to godhood and might have some connections to whom they were before ascension, so it could be a throwback for Asmodeus that he still takes Warlocks despite not needing them anymore.
I don't know why you're defaulting to "need" at all. Asmodeus could empower both clerics and warlocks simply because he wants to. Again, we don't know enough about the mechanics of being a patron for one vs the other to know why most gods only choose a single lane while others see value in both; it simply has to be something that makes going both ways rare.
Needless to say a lot of gods also ascended to godhood and might have some connections to whom they were before ascension, so it could be a throwback for Asmodeus that he still takes Warlocks despite not needing them anymore.
I don't know why you're defaulting to "need" at all. Asmodeus could empower both clerics and warlocks simply because he wants to. Again, we don't know enough about the mechanics of being a patron for one vs the other to know why most gods only choose a single lane while others see value in both; it simply has to be something that makes going both ways rare.
We don't need to know the specifics tho, clearly most deities do not deal with warlocks and yet near all deities have clerics in areas where they have influence, if there was a strong reason to have both then most/all deities would do so, heck even good deities stood behind the wall of the faithless because they believed without it faith would stagnant and that they would become weaker. So if there really was a good reason for a deity to being using warlocks, most/all deities would have warlocks while also having clerics but the vast majority do not. So we can speculate that clearly it's not worthwhile they doing so.
We also know that faith is highly important to deities, a Warlock is somebody who does give services to their patron but a cleric gives faith to their's which is ultimately more in-line with what we know deities tend to be after, faith. So while we don't know "exact" specifics, from what we do know, a Cleric is generally going to be far more preferable to a deity then a warlock. More so, gods generally try to avoid ending out in the Graveyard of the Gods, so clerics who continue to spread their word and influence really are more needed than warlocks who are just after power in a transactional pact.
Rando: "Wait how did you get undead powers from a god."
Your PC: "I uh... just asked. You know you can negotiate right?.... Right?"
Your DM is the only "God" you need to ask. it is how loose or rigid their interpretation of lore is.
In one of my games, i had a God who could give any pact because of players like you who wanted power-sets independent of the lore, and that was kinda his thing. He also would Buy out Warlock contracts from other entities if people wanted to redeem themselves or enter into his service but had a previous pact. ( This was added to bring in a player from another table.) But, the DM could easily pull something like this with any god you are in service to.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
We don't need to know the specifics tho, clearly most deities do not deal with warlocks and yet near all deities have clerics in areas where they have influence, if there was a strong reason to have both then most/all deities would do so, heck even good deities stood behind the wall of the faithless because they believed without it faith would stagnant and that they would become weaker. So if there really was a good reason for a deity to being using warlocks, most/all deities would have warlocks while also having clerics but the vast majority do not. So we can speculate that clearly it's not worthwhile they doing so.
You're just restating what I said. I do agree there's likely a reason for the disparity. What we can't be sure of is what that reason is, so "it makes no sense" is premature on your part.
And yes, both The Raven Queen and Asmodeus are canonical examples of deity-patrons. Maybe they're the only ones, maybe there are more, but they're still valid answers to the OP's question.
We don't need to know the specifics tho, clearly most deities do not deal with warlocks and yet near all deities have clerics in areas where they have influence, if there was a strong reason to have both then most/all deities would do so, heck even good deities stood behind the wall of the faithless because they believed without it faith would stagnant and that they would become weaker. So if there really was a good reason for a deity to being using warlocks, most/all deities would have warlocks while also having clerics but the vast majority do not. So we can speculate that clearly it's not worthwhile they doing so.
You're just restating what I said. I do agree there's likely a reason for the disparity. What we can't be sure of is what that reason is, so "it makes no sense" is premature on your part.
And yes, both The Raven Queen and Asmodeus are canonical examples of deity-patrons. Maybe they're the only ones, maybe there are more, but they're still valid answers to the OP's question.
They aren't because OP's question was specifically about Deities that can be Undead Patrons, which neither Asmodeus or The Raven Queen could be and actually raises the question of if any god could even be considered undead to begin with, even Myrkul the god of bones, isn't actually undead despite the fact he died (went to the graveyard of the gods, possibly fully killed by the Kalach-cha) and managed to come back, as a god but gods/deities do not live like mortals do, how they live and die is decidedly very different.
And again, we do not need to know the exact reason, we know enough about how important faith is to know it makes no sense for most deities, they are reliant on faith to remain alive. If a deity isn't getting worship then their power will significantly fall and a weakened deity is easy prey for a potential demi-god to try and claim divinity by stealing their domain(s). We also know what deities do when they desperately desire strong followers, they create chosen, like many deities did in preparation for the 2nd sundering, they weren't going around signing warlock contracts/pacts.
Ultimately a DM at table can decide whatever they want but in terms of being lore compliant, it's really not going to be a common thing, most deities simply don't do contracts/pacts and even if they did, can a deity even be considered "undead", they are in a completely different state of being once they become a deity, even if they were an undead that became a deity.
Again, it's worth noting that the "canon" info on the Raven Queen acting as a patron is a maybe, and Asmodeus is very inconsistently presented as a deity in 5e, and much more consistently presented as an archfiend. He's not listed as a deity in the 2014 PHB, and the 2014 DMG notes that it's copying the table that lists him as one from 4e, thus making that an outdated source. The Sword Coast book is the only actual body of lore that refers to him as a deity, and it's somewhat incongruous with the lore provided in the Tome of Foes, since that book indicates that Asmodeus doesn't take an interest in mortal souls and instead focuses on manipulating cosmic beings, whereas the SCAG claims he responds to mortal prayers.
At the end of the day it's all open to interpretation and reinterpretation as a DM needs for their campaign/setting, but the hard examples of deities functioning as patrons are few, far between, and usually implicit or otherwise involve trying to stitch bits and pieces together rather than overt statements.
implict does not mean explicit.
If you want explict, let's look at the Great Old One: ...unspeakable being from the Far Realm or an elder god...
You go ahead and do you as well. I think that by omission and explictly saying so for GOO, that gods are now on the menu if you want.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I believe 2014 does a better job of showing the intention of what is and is not a valid warlock patron but does have the conflict of both saying that Warlock Patrons aren't gods but having GOO say Elder Gods. So this either means that Elder Gods are considered as something different to gods or there is another caveat going and I believe that was also described well in 2014.
It makes no sense on the part of a Deity, that if they can have clerics serving them that they would also spend the time to personally deal with warlocks, instead of just making them become clerics too. An Elder God of the Far Realm likely has little to no power within the Mortal Plane or Outer Planes and thus has no clerics serving them, as such to try and extend their influence into those planes, they would have to engage with Warlocks and Cults.
Now beings that can serve as gods might also have underlings that might serve as Warlock Patrons, Hexblade is a great example of this, some of the more notable Hexblade Patrons were created by the Raven Queen, the Raven Queen isn't going to deal with Warlocks directly but could indirectly via a proxy such as a Hexblade.
Of course a DM at table can run it how they want but this is how I believe this is the most likely intention of what makes a valid Warlock Patron, and it's basically any powerful entity that does not have clerics serving them (at least in the targeted realm), looking to spread their influence.
Now, if somebody has a pact and then that god somehow manages to get enough influence or the warlock travels to a plane/realm where that god has influence, that warlock would remain a warlock as the pact in question would still remain in effect despite being somewhere that, that god has clerics.
and 2014 is gone. 2024 has arrived. Have a blessed day.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
And, again, 2024 still has not given a single example of a deity as a Patron. Thus, common sense indicates that they intend the trend started in 2014 to continue in official material. If you want to do it differently that’s your prerogative, but the closest mention of deities as the term applies to 5e is “elder gods”, and I don’t recall seeing Cthulhu or Nyarlhotep or Shoggoth or any other Lovecraftian names listed in any tables of gods for a setting.
That doesn't really change anything to my response tho, nothing I said is actually invalidated by changes to 2024.
Further to this, Warlock in 2024 does state this
Gods aren't listed as a type of Patron, however Elder Gods from the Far Realm would still be valid as warlock patrons since they are entities of the Far Realm. However Elder Gods of the Far Realm would not have clerics, they are of the Far Realm, not the Prime Material Plane or Outer Realms. So it's really not invalidated anything, just 2014 describes things better than 2024 does in regards to this.
I like how everyone just ignores the Raven Queen who has been listed as officially both a god and patron
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I do not know where Raven Queen has been officially listed as a Patron?
I know there was a UA for Raven Queen as a Patron but it never reached official release, most likely due to the existence of Hexblade, which shifts the Patron from The Raven Queen herself to servants acting as Patrons.
Something I already covered previously by instead suggesting Myrkul, whom as a god has Lich servants and Lich Priests/Clerics which would serve as Undead Patrons quiet nicely while allowing the character to be a devout follower of Myrkul. Which works in the same vein as the Raven Queen and Hexblade patrons that act beneath her.
From Hexblade
Edit: WotC left that door open.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
That's still not enough to say she is listed as an official patron, yes they left the door open but it was never confirmed.
The “speculate” part is fairly operative in that quote as well. It’s one small and non-assertive blip in the trend. Again, not gonna insist everyone must not use gods as patrons, but none are listed for Celestial, none are listed for Undead when Vecna would probably be a more well known uber lich than Acererak, and Hexblade is noncommittal on the matter. It’s a clear trend in the lore.
Although probably a moot point given the age of the thread, I'll dip into earlier editions for inspiration should anyone want it:
Hoar aka: The Doombringer, The Poet of Justice, Lord of Three Thunders and Hurler of Thunder. Portfolio of powers: Revenge, Poetic Justice and Retribution. Alignment (if you use it): Lawful Neutral but worshippers alignments ran: LG, LN, LE, NG, NN, NE. In the old hierarchies of godly power Hoar was a Demi-power and dwelt on Mechanus and back in ad&d days he had a priesthood that could cast a spell to create a Revenenant. So you could port Hoar over to 5e and he could be the power behind a warlock, wherein you use the warlock class and possibly reborn race as a version of a revenant character. This might be some sort of punishment or maybe some quest Hoar has bestowed upon the PC for past mis-deeds.
Jergal aka: Lord of the End of Everything, Scribe of the Doomed, The Forgotten One, The Seneschal of the Crystal Spire, The Pitiless One. Portfolio of powers: Fatalism, Order in Death, Proper Burial, Guardian of Tombs, Protector of the Names of the Dead. Alignment (if you use it): Lawful Neutral but worshippers alignments ran: LG, LN, LE, NG, NN, NE. In the old hierarchies of godly power Jergal was a Demi-power and dwelt in the Gray Wastes. He worked with Kelemvor (the actual god of the dead) and Jergal could assume the form of any undead and gain all their respective abilities. To quote form the ad&d dogma for his religion: "Undeath is not an escape or a reward, it is simply a duty of the chosen few who worship the Lord of the End of Everything", so in this regard an undead or undying warlock may arise with Jergal as a patron and be task with collecting the names of the dead which might be rather fitting for a pact of tome warlock, interestingly in the blurb for Jergal it says when he appeared in avatar form he wouldn't wield a weapon so pact of blade warlocks would be rather rare.
Velshroon aka: The Vaunted, The Archmage of Necromancy, the Necromancer, The Lord of the Forsaken Crypt, Lord of the Forgotten Crypt, the Lich-Lord, Patron of Evil Liches. POrtfolio of powers; Necromancy, Necromancers, Lichdom, Evil Liches, Undeath. Alignment (if you use it): Neutral Evil but worshippers alignments ran: LN, LE, NN, NE, CN, CE. In the old hierarchies of godly power Velshroon was a Demi-power and dwelt on Gehenna. He's a god of necromancy...safe to say if he wants you to be an undead warlock he could do it whether your PC was willing or not.
These are the three I can be bothered to delve into at present, I'll fiinsh by saying the Gods were fleshed out to a much greater degree in ad&d and each had a type of cleric called a "speciality priest" affiliated with them, they came with all manner of special abilities and powers, so you could port the notion of a speciality priest over to 5e and use warlock to represent it.
Small point of order:
The Raven Queen is the Deity of Death in the generic D&D setting, but in the Forgotten Realms setting, the Realm of Death has a small pantheon: Kelemvor, as the Impartial Judge of the Dead, Bhaal as the Lord of Murder, Myrkul as the Hand of Death and Jergal as the Scribe of the Dead. Jergal, in particular, has an infinite supply of 'Book Mummies'. Jergal records the events of a deceased person's life on the pages of a 'Book Mummy'. When the pages of a 'Book Mummy' are filled up, that 'Book Mummy' closes up and shuffles off to a shadowy archive and a new 'Book Mummy' takes its place.
1) "Not typically served by Clerics" means that having Clerics isn't impossible for some of these entities.
2) I think it's a bit unimaginative to say it "makes no sense." We don't have a concrete or definitive idea of what a given entity might get out of being a patron or a deity, so being both could easily be worth it for some.
Another example of an entity who could qualify as both is Asmodeus - he's listed as a deity in both the DMG and Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, and as a warlock patron in the PHB.
Asmodeus is a more interesting one, since most people would probably be adverse to open worship of Asmodeus. And while we do not have a concrete or definitive idea, there should at least be a reason. More so, most gods that do have Clerics, if they had somebody they really wanted serving them then they could also have them as their "chosen", which is not something a player would normally ever be but something that does exist in lore.
With Asmodeus, since open worship of him is probably quiet a restricted set, his influence may not be as great as other deities and so still deals with Warlocks, altho in the case of Asmodeus it does seem odd that he himself would still be directly dealing with warlocks given how many Devils serves under him that could just do the job for him, instead Asmodeus seems to have some want of converting all Tieflings to being related too him, there is also the Toril Thirteen... too much lore to go over there. Needless to say a lot of gods also ascended to godhood and might have some connections to whom they were before ascension, so it could be a throwback for Asmodeus that he still takes Warlocks despite not needing them anymore.
I don't know why you're defaulting to "need" at all. Asmodeus could empower both clerics and warlocks simply because he wants to. Again, we don't know enough about the mechanics of being a patron for one vs the other to know why most gods only choose a single lane while others see value in both; it simply has to be something that makes going both ways rare.
We don't need to know the specifics tho, clearly most deities do not deal with warlocks and yet near all deities have clerics in areas where they have influence, if there was a strong reason to have both then most/all deities would do so, heck even good deities stood behind the wall of the faithless because they believed without it faith would stagnant and that they would become weaker. So if there really was a good reason for a deity to being using warlocks, most/all deities would have warlocks while also having clerics but the vast majority do not. So we can speculate that clearly it's not worthwhile they doing so.
We also know that faith is highly important to deities, a Warlock is somebody who does give services to their patron but a cleric gives faith to their's which is ultimately more in-line with what we know deities tend to be after, faith. So while we don't know "exact" specifics, from what we do know, a Cleric is generally going to be far more preferable to a deity then a warlock. More so, gods generally try to avoid ending out in the Graveyard of the Gods, so clerics who continue to spread their word and influence really are more needed than warlocks who are just after power in a transactional pact.
Rando: "Wait how did you get undead powers from a god."
Your PC: "I uh... just asked. You know you can negotiate right?.... Right?"
Your DM is the only "God" you need to ask.
it is how loose or rigid their interpretation of lore is.
In one of my games, i had a God who could give any pact because of players like you who wanted power-sets independent of the lore, and that was kinda his thing. He also would Buy out Warlock contracts from other entities if people wanted to redeem themselves or enter into his service but had a previous pact. ( This was added to bring in a player from another table.)
But, the DM could easily pull something like this with any god you are in service to.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
You're just restating what I said. I do agree there's likely a reason for the disparity. What we can't be sure of is what that reason is, so "it makes no sense" is premature on your part.
And yes, both The Raven Queen and Asmodeus are canonical examples of deity-patrons. Maybe they're the only ones, maybe there are more, but they're still valid answers to the OP's question.
They aren't because OP's question was specifically about Deities that can be Undead Patrons, which neither Asmodeus or The Raven Queen could be and actually raises the question of if any god could even be considered undead to begin with, even Myrkul the god of bones, isn't actually undead despite the fact he died (went to the graveyard of the gods, possibly fully killed by the Kalach-cha) and managed to come back, as a god but gods/deities do not live like mortals do, how they live and die is decidedly very different.
And again, we do not need to know the exact reason, we know enough about how important faith is to know it makes no sense for most deities, they are reliant on faith to remain alive. If a deity isn't getting worship then their power will significantly fall and a weakened deity is easy prey for a potential demi-god to try and claim divinity by stealing their domain(s). We also know what deities do when they desperately desire strong followers, they create chosen, like many deities did in preparation for the 2nd sundering, they weren't going around signing warlock contracts/pacts.
Ultimately a DM at table can decide whatever they want but in terms of being lore compliant, it's really not going to be a common thing, most deities simply don't do contracts/pacts and even if they did, can a deity even be considered "undead", they are in a completely different state of being once they become a deity, even if they were an undead that became a deity.
Again, it's worth noting that the "canon" info on the Raven Queen acting as a patron is a maybe, and Asmodeus is very inconsistently presented as a deity in 5e, and much more consistently presented as an archfiend. He's not listed as a deity in the 2014 PHB, and the 2014 DMG notes that it's copying the table that lists him as one from 4e, thus making that an outdated source. The Sword Coast book is the only actual body of lore that refers to him as a deity, and it's somewhat incongruous with the lore provided in the Tome of Foes, since that book indicates that Asmodeus doesn't take an interest in mortal souls and instead focuses on manipulating cosmic beings, whereas the SCAG claims he responds to mortal prayers.
At the end of the day it's all open to interpretation and reinterpretation as a DM needs for their campaign/setting, but the hard examples of deities functioning as patrons are few, far between, and usually implicit or otherwise involve trying to stitch bits and pieces together rather than overt statements.