I've always been of the mindset that if you feel like you "have" to give a character flaws to "balance them out"... then you're doing it wrong. You're not really making an RP character at that point - you're min/maxing a character sheet, and then plugging in some detriments before you try to sell it to your DM just so you can point at them and go "No no, it's totally okay, he's an alcoholic (although he gets +3d6 damage when drunk)!"
A lot of good points have been already been made for more... organic give-and-take. You've become a master of one thing - how long did it take you? What did you have to give up along the way? What good/bad things occurred doing this?
And as you become more skilled in other things, you're obviously not keeping those original skills as sharp as you would. So, you're giving up skill for versatility - especially when we're talking about professions. You can be a good reader, a good cyclist, and a bunch of things in real life, sure, but it's not a fair comparison. A better one is thinking about how many people have multiple degrees in different fields. How much of their life is taken up by that? And is that person still as good in the first thing they got their degree in when they finish their second?
Obviously you can change careers and learn new things, but that takes time... and skills not used will fade somewhat. So a Master of All is hard to present without some serious explanation. There's a reason for the "jack of all trades, master of none" phrase.
A lot of good points have been already been made for more... organic give-and-take. You've become a master of one thing - how long did it take you? What did you have to give up along the way? What good/bad things occurred doing this?
And as you become more skilled in other things, you're obviously not keeping those original skills as sharp as you would. So, you're giving up skill for versatility - especially when we're talking about professions. You can be a good reader, a good cyclist, and a bunch of things in real life, sure, but it's not a fair comparison. A better one is thinking about how many people have multiple degrees in different fields. How much of their life is taken up by that? And is that person still as good in the first thing they got their degree in when they finish their second?
Obviously you can change careers and learn new things, but that takes time... and skills not used will fade somewhat. So a Master of All is hard to present without some serious explanation. There's a reason for the "jack of all trades, master of none" phrase.
~