Whilst I appreciate that the current class-skills may leave something to be desired, and may unduly encourage stereotyping, I would argue that there are two very good reasons for keeping ti as written: logic and balance.
On the logic front, we have to ask what the typical (though not strictly stereotypical) member of the class is likely to have ACCESS to. It is improbable that a cleric would be trained in Tumble for example, and nigh impossible that a barbarian would have Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty). Class skills represent the realistic access to the skill, and should be seen an a reality-enhancing tool rather than a straightjacket. If certain skills are really required, there are a few solutions: Cosmpolitan from FR is one, multiclassing is another. From the description of your grey elven fighter, he is probably a multiclass aristocrat/fighter: this would achieve all of the desired skills bar Tumble, which could be taken with Cosmopolitan.
Regarding play balance, we have to bear in mind what makes the ranger and barbarian preferable to the fighter. The ranger is superior to the fighter principally in skills. The spell selection available is virtually trivial compared to the main strengths of the class, and the bonus feats are easily nullified by the fighter (by top-level the fighter can take all the ranger's free feats and have seven surplus). The ranger's only key advantage is destroyed. As for the barbarian, disposing of his skill advantage leaves him with rage, minimal DR and fast movement: hardly worth 11 feats. It is these two classes which will suffer most as the fighter moves in on their portfolio. And regarding the point of people generating background to fit 'class skills', this is a moot point. Experienced roleplayers can make a background to fit anything. I'm sure any of us here could make a background justifying why your fighter should have a plethora of skills- but in order to keep a level playing-field, the rules should be adhered to.
On the logic front, we have to ask what the typical (though not strictly stereotypical) member of the class is likely to have ACCESS to. It is improbable that a cleric would be trained in Tumble for example, and nigh impossible that a barbarian would have Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty). Class skills represent the realistic access to the skill, and should be seen an a reality-enhancing tool rather than a straightjacket. If certain skills are really required, there are a few solutions: Cosmpolitan from FR is one, multiclassing is another. From the description of your grey elven fighter, he is probably a multiclass aristocrat/fighter: this would achieve all of the desired skills bar Tumble, which could be taken with Cosmopolitan.
Regarding play balance, we have to bear in mind what makes the ranger and barbarian preferable to the fighter. The ranger is superior to the fighter principally in skills. The spell selection available is virtually trivial compared to the main strengths of the class, and the bonus feats are easily nullified by the fighter (by top-level the fighter can take all the ranger's free feats and have seven surplus). The ranger's only key advantage is destroyed. As for the barbarian, disposing of his skill advantage leaves him with rage, minimal DR and fast movement: hardly worth 11 feats. It is these two classes which will suffer most as the fighter moves in on their portfolio. And regarding the point of people generating background to fit 'class skills', this is a moot point. Experienced roleplayers can make a background to fit anything. I'm sure any of us here could make a background justifying why your fighter should have a plethora of skills- but in order to keep a level playing-field, the rules should be adhered to.
