MarkB
Legend
This has the same problems 4e had with its skill list.
First, you get pirates born on the sea who have never been above sea level being master mountain climbers, and the reverse of steppe dwellers who have only see small creeks being master swimmers.
It also removes much opportunity for classic ability checks. With a "Strength-based skill" that covers everything Strengthy, why make a Strength check ever when you can just make an Athletics check. You're trained at Athletics, you know how to use your strength and position yourself for lifting objects, why can't you use that to batter down doors or bend bars?
Well, there is a certain degree of commonality between different uses of the same ability. Certainly, I'd expect a trained sailor who was able to swarm up rigging to also be better than average at mountaineering, and someone who was particularly good at running to be better than an untrained person at swimming.
One option would be to use something similar to the Cortex system's approach to skills - you have a small list of major skills, then a list of sub-skills for each major skill. The first, say, 5 points you put into a skill go into the major skill, and can be applied to any task on that skill's sub-skill list.
When you spend points above 5 on that skill, you have to choose specific sub-skills to dedicate them to, specialising in particular tasks.
So, for instance, a character might spend 5 points on the Athletics skill, and then a further 3 points on the Jump sub-skill. When performing athletic tasks he hasn't specialised in, such as swimming and climbing, his bonus (excluding ability modifier) is +5, but when attempting to jump his bonus is +8.