Hi,
In terms of environments, just because an environment is not as extreme as the arctic or the desert does not mean that it is trivial to survive in it. Likewise just because an environment shares the same name as a geological feature does not make it less of an environment.
For me the question is, why is it difficult to survive in an environment? And different answers should lead to different skills, but same answers to the same skill. E.g. mountains are not a difficult environment because they are mountains, they are difficult because you have to climb (which is a different skill) and because of features that are covered by other environments as well (i.e. because they are hot and dry and there is no vegetation -> see desert, because they are a glacier -> see arctic, and so on). My experience is only the Alps, which are definitely not the most dangerous mountains out there, but according to my survival training they only differ in weather conditions and steepness from the rest of Austria/Switzerland/France. And weather conditions alone should in my opinion in a system designed for simplicity not be enough to justify a new skill.
So expanding the human list and separating things out a bit:
Arctic/Tundra
Desert
Forest
Hill(y)/Mountain(ou)s
Jungle
Plains/Steppes
Sea/Ocean
Swamp/Marsh
Arctic/Tundra - yes
Desert - yes
Forest - to survive in a forest is actually quite simple (at least the ones I know about) when you have some basic understanding of Survival. So for me that's the simpler version of Jungle -> I would combine it with Jungle
Plains/Steppes - I thought about that, but they are basically a desert with a bit more water -> I would put them under desert. But I agree that they might justify their own subskill.
Sea/Ocean - I don't think this is a human environment. Either your technology works or you drown -> covered by Engineering skills.
Swamp/Marsh - I see this as a part of Jungle, as it has just less vegetation but humidity is quite similar.
So for humans I really see only 3-4 kinds of specialization, which supports the goal of simplicity in HARP SF.
then we have at least one Aquatic for amphibious/aquatic species and gene-engineered humans. Subterranean for underground dwellers?
Then we have the really hostile environments such as airless worlds, deep space, hellworlds, iceworlds, gas giants.
I suspect there is a requirement here that Foraging is only possible (available/usable as a skill) in certain environments where one's species can live without technology (breathe the air, drink the liquids, eat the food); Survival might even be limited in availability if your character must be cocooned in an environment suit.
Best wishes,
Nicholas
Yes, I completely missed the non-human species. So definitely
Subterranean
Space (covers also thos airless moons and so on)
Gas (gas giants)
Ocean
The rest I would put to SysOp discretion.
One more comment: I see Survival as having the right behaviour. and finding water. It does not in my opinion cover identification of the edible plants, as this is Biology, or?
BR
Juergen