Our aim in the current study was to develop a validity scale for the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID-5) to detect noncredible overreported responding. To this end, we used a rare symptoms approach and identified extreme response options on PID-5 items that were infrequently endorsed by students in 3 different university samples (N = 1,370) and in a psychiatric patient sample (N = 194). The resulting 10-item scale (the PID-5-ORS) produced adequate-to-good estimates of internal reliability and was significantly correlated with the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructued Form (MMPI-2-RF) overreporting validity scales, providing evidence of concurrent validity. The criterion validity of the PID-5-ORS was demonstrated in an analog simulation design study. More specifically, university students instructed to overreport (n = 80) scored substantially higher on the PID-5-ORS relative to both a group of genuine psychiatric patients and students instructed to complete the PID-5 under standard (honest) instructions (n = 161); the effect size magnitudes associated with these differences were large. Classification accuracy analyses further revealed that high scores on the PID-5-ORS were associated with high specificity (and thus, low rates of false positive classifications) in differentiating overreporters from genuine patients, with sensitivity being somewhat weaker.