I'm curious why they left them out?

What was their logic?

Just curious, I suppose.

Pantheons belong in Setting books.
This is a problem for a game with character classes that need gods for certain classes. This may mean they'll be selling setting books instead of leaning almost entirely on Forgotten Realms.

Does it really matter though?

Paladins have been essentially separated from having any religious affiliations.

Clerics need nothing more setting wise than their "domains".

WotC D&D doesn't need pantheons...

IMO it's good to have some default deities to help GMs with their world building, but ok to put them in the DMG I guess. I like how Shadowdark has 7 default gods in the rulebook and asks players to pick one for their PC. The 4e Dawn War pantheon also worked well to similar effect. It gets GMs & players thinking about the PCs' characters and how they relate to the world.

Quote from: Jaeger on November 28, 2024, 12:53:08 AMDoes it really matter though?

Paladins have been essentially separated from having any religious affiliations.

Clerics need nothing more setting wise than their "domains".

WotC D&D doesn't need pantheons...

I agree, but at the same time it's still an odd decision. It would have cost them nothing to just reprint the table from the 5e PHB.

Maybe they just forgot, or maybe they're planning to sell deities for $0.36 each on D&D Beyond.

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 28, 2024, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: Jaeger on November 28, 2024, 12:53:08 AMDoes it really matter though?

Paladins have been essentially separated from having any religious affiliations.

Clerics need nothing more setting wise than their "domains".

WotC D&D doesn't need pantheons...

I agree, but at the same time it's still an odd decision. It would have cost them nothing to just reprint the table from the 5e PHB.

Maybe they just forgot, or maybe they're planning to sell deities for $0.36 each on D&D Beyond.

Yeah, I wonder if it was intentional?  Or perhaps it's just part of a philosophy change, of sorts.  "The player characters, need only to believe in themselves."

Quote from: Jaeger on November 28, 2024, 12:53:08 AMDoes it really matter though?

Paladins have been essentially separated from having any religious affiliations.

Clerics need nothing more setting wise than their "domains".

WotC D&D doesn't need pantheons...

That is an interesting thought. They could be moving away from deities entirely. I'm sure fantasy pantheons are problematic in the Woke mind.

The Greyhawk gods are listed in the DMG. It's not like the new edition is supposed to have fidelity to the last 50 years of the game, it's meant to sell digital dice and minis.

The new Player's handbook is very setting abstract. I know it's not popular to enjoy it, and I truly do hate WotC...

But 5.5 is a legitimately better version of 5.0
Just as 3.5 was a significant upgrade from 3.0

The Subclasses have always just been domains, and each domain talks about what kind of Gods would have purview over that Domain.

You don't need to list any Gods in the PHB because it doesn't assume any specific setting. That will be for the DM to tell their players and let them choose.

Quote from: Man at Arms on November 28, 2024, 01:00:08 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 28, 2024, 12:37:36 PMI agree, but at the same time it's still an odd decision. It would have cost them nothing to just reprint the table from the 5e PHB.

Maybe they just forgot, or maybe they're planning to sell deities for $0.36 each on D&D Beyond.

Yeah, I wonder if it was intentional?  Or perhaps it's just part of a philosophy change, of sorts.  "The player characters, need only to believe in themselves."

In the 2014 PHB, each god is a single line with just name, alignment, and symbol. That seems nearly pointless to me.

It makes more sense to me to either have no named deities (like 1E and 2E), or to have at least a paragraph on each (like in 3E - though ideally more).

Quote from: jhkim on November 29, 2024, 07:49:16 PM

Quote from: Man at Arms on November 28, 2024, 01:00:08 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 28, 2024, 12:37:36 PMI agree, but at the same time it's still an odd decision. It would have cost them nothing to just reprint the table from the 5e PHB.

Maybe they just forgot, or maybe they're planning to sell deities for $0.36 each on D&D Beyond.

Yeah, I wonder if it was intentional?  Or perhaps it's just part of a philosophy change, of sorts.  "The player characters, need only to believe in themselves."

In the 2014 PHB, each god is a single line with just name, alignment, and symbol. That seems nearly pointless to me.

It makes more sense to me to either have no named deities (like 1E and 2E), or to have at least a paragraph on each (like in 3E - though ideally more).

I have to disagree with that first sentence. I think you're coming at it from the perspective of the (for lack of a better term) "advanced roleplayer". To my mind, a D&D PHB should be made chiefly for the newcomer and/or casual player, and with at least an eye to the younger (read: "teenaged") player. As a youth, I played a lot of games with people who didn't care enough to own the book or investigate the lore, but were happy to sit down and play with those of us that did. It's worth stressing that without those people, I would not have had a group to play with. When someone like that decides to play Cleric just because it sounds fun, a god's name, alignment and portfolio are all they need.

The advantage of the deity charts in the 5e handbook is that it allowed them to give the pantheons for several settings, which works especially well now, since anyone who wants to learn more about a given deity can easily google it.

The little block entries in the 3e book were certainly nice for those interested. The only real problem was that they put Greyhawk deities in the PHB and then proceeded to publish almost exclusively Forgotten Realms material. Optimally we'd get a bit of both: pick one setting (probably FR these days) and detail a few of the major gods, and then include the big chart in the appendices to give more options.

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 30, 2024, 02:41:18 PM

Quote from: jhkim on November 29, 2024, 07:49:16 PM

Quote from: Man at Arms on November 28, 2024, 01:00:08 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 28, 2024, 12:37:36 PMI agree, but at the same time it's still an odd decision. It would have cost them nothing to just reprint the table from the 5e PHB.

Maybe they just forgot, or maybe they're planning to sell deities for $0.36 each on D&D Beyond.

Yeah, I wonder if it was intentional?  Or perhaps it's just part of a philosophy change, of sorts.  "The player characters, need only to believe in themselves."

In the 2014 PHB, each god is a single line with just name, alignment, and symbol. That seems nearly pointless to me.

It makes more sense to me to either have no named deities (like 1E and 2E), or to have at least a paragraph on each (like in 3E - though ideally more).

I have to disagree with that first sentence. I think you're coming at it from the perspective of the (for lack of a better term) "advanced roleplayer". To my mind, a D&D PHB should be made chiefly for the newcomer and/or casual player, and with at least an eye to the younger (read: "teenaged") player. As a youth, I played a lot of games with people who didn't care enough to own the book or investigate the lore, but were happy to sit down and play with those of us that did. It's worth stressing that without those people, I would not have had a group to play with. When someone like that decides to play Cleric just because it sounds fun, a god's name, alignment and portfolio are all they need.

The advantage of the deity charts in the 5e handbook is that it allowed them to give the pantheons for several settings, which works especially well now, since anyone who wants to learn more about a given deity can easily google it.

The little block entries in the 3e book were certainly nice for those interested. The only real problem was that they put Greyhawk deities in the PHB and then proceeded to publish almost exclusively Forgotten Realms material. Optimally we'd get a bit of both: pick one setting (probably FR these days) and detail a few of the major gods, and then include the big chart in the appendices to give more options.

GreyHawk's setting is provided in the DMG with it's Pantheon. A new player is gonna sit down and look at the powers first and decide what they think sounds fun and cool. Fighters, Rogues, Wizards, and all the other classes outside of the Paladin don't have "Overhead" with their fantasy.

As a new player you can just look at them, go "Oh that Fighter Eldricht Knight looks cool" without worrying about any overhead backstory first.

Putting the Gods first before the Cleric powers forces a new player to have to think about what God they want to have their character serve first and foremost. Gods are also very much tied to their specific settings... As a new player you might see the Forgotten Realm Gods, get really into the lore of Pelor and decide you want to play a Cleric of Pelor just to find out...

"Sorry Dude, we're running in my homebrew, these are what my Gods are, they don't match any of the ones in the PHB."

So it's better, at least in my opinion, to present the Cleric and it's subclasses first without any God baggage... then a player can go, "Oh wow, I like the powers of the Sun Domain! Hey man, in your world, what Gods would have access to the Sun domain?"

I think Shadowdark has the exact right amount of detail:

SAINT TERRAGNIS
(LAWFUL)
A legendary knight who is the
patron of most lawful humans.
She ascended to godhood long
ago and is the embodiment of
righteousness and justice.

GEDE (NEUTRAL)
The god of feasts, mirth, and the
wilds. Gede is usually peaceful,
but primal storms rage when
her anger rises. Many elves and
halflings worship her.

MADEERA THE
COVENANT (LAWFUL)
Madeera was the first
manifestation of Law. She carries
every law of reality, a dictate
called the Covenant, written on
her skin in precise symbols.

ORD (NEUTRAL)
Ord the Unbending, the Wise,
the Secret-Keeper. He is the god
of magic, knowledge, secrets,
and equilibrium.

MEMNON (CHAOTIC)
Memnon was the first
manifestation of Chaos. He is
Madeera's twin, a red-maned,
leonine being whose ultimate
ambition is to rend the cosmic
laws of the Covenant from his
sister's skin.

RAMLAAT (CHAOTIC)
Ramlaat is the Pillager, the
Barbaric, the Horde. Many orcs
worship him and live by the
Blood Rite, a prophecy that says
only the strongest will survive a
coming doom.

SHUNE THE VILE
(CHAOTIC)
Shune whispers arcane secrets
to sorcerers and witches who
call to her in the dark hours.
She schemes to displace Ord so
she can control the vast flow of
magic herself.

Quote from: Orphan81 on November 30, 2024, 03:15:22 PMSo it's better, at least in my opinion, to present the Cleric and it's subclasses first without any God baggage... then a player can go, "Oh wow, I like the powers of the Sun Domain! Hey man, in your world, what Gods would have access to the Sun domain?"

Sure, but a lot of people in their early gaming careers don't have homebrew worlds. They just invent a town or whatever and go from there. Even a lot of DMs that do homebrew don't want to deal with making up a pantheon. I've played in (and run) multiple games where the DM said "eh fuck it; just use the PHB gods".

Quote from: Orphan81 on November 30, 2024, 03:15:22 PMPutting the Gods first before the Cleric powers forces a new player to have to think about what God they want to have their character serve first and foremost. Gods are also very much tied to their specific settings... As a new player you might see the Forgotten Realm Gods, get really into the lore of Pelor and decide you want to play a Cleric of Pelor just to find out...

Yeah, I wouldn't suggest putting them first, but a list of Gods you can use if you don't feel like making up your own is only ever going to be a plus to have in the PHB.

Quote from: Orphan81 on November 30, 2024, 03:15:22 PMGreyHawk's setting is provided in the DMG with it's Pantheon.

And that's probably the real reason. From WOTC's perspective, a problem with both 3rd and 5th edition (I skipped 4th, so I don't know about that) was that you really didn't need the DMG. As long as your DM could do a bare minimum of improvisation, you could play the whole game off of just the PHB. Playing 3rd edition growing up, very few people I knew bought the DMG, and no one ever brought it to games. You didn't necessarily need the Monster Manual either, but it was cool and pretty useful, so DMs at least bought it there was usually one at any given game session. When I started running 5e, I didn't bother to buy the DMG, and I never missed it.

I haven't read through the 2024 books (and probably won't), but it would make sense to spread the information out more evenly so that all three books are considered must-buys for both players and DMs.

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 30, 2024, 02:41:18 PM

Quote from: jhkim on November 29, 2024, 07:49:16 PMIn the 2014 PHB, each god is a single line with just name, alignment, and symbol. That seems nearly pointless to me.

It makes more sense to me to either have no named deities (like 1E and 2E), or to have at least a paragraph on each (like in 3E - though ideally more).

I have to disagree with that first sentence. I think you're coming at it from the perspective of the (for lack of a better term) "advanced roleplayer". To my mind, a D&D PHB should be made chiefly for the newcomer and/or casual player, and with at least an eye to the younger (read: "teenaged") player. As a youth, I played a lot of games with people who didn't care enough to own the book or investigate the lore, but were happy to sit down and play with those of us that did. It's worth stressing that without those people, I would not have had a group to play with. When someone like that decides to play Cleric just because it sounds fun, a god's name, alignment and portfolio are all they need.

You imply that it's important that players conform and be given the name of an "official" god from a table. But I know from experience that beginners can play just fine without that single-line entry.

I remember playing as a youth back in the 1980s. There was no mention of gods in the Player's Handbook or Basic Set. I didn't feel the lack in the slightest. I don't look back and feel that my old D&D days were flawed by the lack of a name-only god. Sometimes we'd come up with a background for characters including what religion they were, but other times we just didn't bother with that sort of detail.

A cleric's god can be just a name on a chart with no description, but it could also just be unspecified. In most real-world polytheistic religions, a cleric usually wasn't dedicated to a single god. They were a holy person who respected all the gods.