Nice list of changes, and whilst I do agree on some of this points, I would offer an idea that we used with chi-skills, and some other skills when we felt it fit in. When one of my players rolled an insanely high Chi Speed manoeuvre, open-ended sometimes results in that, and this would, if it where a spell, result in double-effect or triple, or whatever, I would let the effect of the chi skill last for another round (or two), no roll to maintain, or perhaps even better, give them an extra "round of actions" the following round (if the skill in use was Chi Speed). I mean, chi-speed is silly really.. it takes a round to initiate, and the following round you get two round, so basically, its a delayed action plus another action.. the pay-off is not satisfactory compared to the cost in DPs to have the skills high enough to work properly most of the time. The spell Haste at least, you can scale up. So its "worth" more...
You idea of Arcane Crafts is a good one, but that us basically just making certain skills in the same skill category, put into a sub-category, no more changes. Yes? Seems redundant, but perhaps its easier to think of them skills that way. So nothing changes except in name.
You attunement rationale is all right to me, I rarely have players creating magical stuff anyway, I mean, I once has a player who tried playing a Thaumaturge, but he ended up retiring him (went back to his magical hide-out-island-community og thaumaturges), because he felt useless. Making it one skill, could potentially, make it possible for players to more "easily" create magical stuff later in a campaign, if and/or when they decide upon such a course of action. I would use this.
Beastmastery: Well I see your point with this one, but then with professions like druid and the beastmaster would need that talent, in addition to the special talents to master beasts in that way they do. Still, got no good argument for not doing it the way you suggest. I would consider it.
Horticulture: what did that skill do again?
hehe. Why not, but it could also just be a lore skill, with my understanding of the skill by how its written in the skill section in the rule book. I would perhaps keep the skill, but perhaps move it to general. Because its not a pure craft skill, and not a pure lore skill, its includes some of both qualities. I mean, a weapon smith should have lore: weapons and lore: metals & alloys, not just the craft skill... at least that?s my opinion.
Ambush: I?d keep it. I see your point, but for what I would arguably call "balance-issues" I would keep the ambush skill, same with sniping.
Poisoning: like horticulture, this is also a sort of lore skill, which is why I gather they are seperate from both craft and lore, at least with poisoning. Its a skill that encompasses both knowledge about, but also the know-how to use. Its not crafting poison, you flower-bed does that, you harvest it (with herbcraft) and prepare and apply with this skill, whilst also identify its qualities and such. I would keep this. Poisons are powerful and rare (at least in my setting).
Dirty Fighting: well, both yes and no. I rarely use it, my players rarely use it. I should use it. To kick my players arses. After that I can see if having it as a separate skill has any merit.
