agnosticism

It's hard to believe in agnosticism. The core book was planned to come with a campaign world, but shifted over to the title of 'generic fantasy', shortly afterwards. However, that's a difficult title to parse.

A 'generic fantasy' work should surely allow one to play something similar to Lord of the Rings. And indeed there is some equivalent of a Lock spell, like Gandalf used against the Balrog in Moria, and healing skills, such as Elrond's, are present. But the notion of an in-between world, where one is as invisible as a ghost, but can be clearly seen by wraiths? Entirely absent. Perhaps someone could add it.

And generic fantasy should surely allow players to play a band of elven heroes from the Elf Quest world, and sure enough the mind-control powers from the book could represent some of this. However, this requires healing magic, which would have to be removed for any world which did not contain healing magic. And the same goes for the freeflowing magic of The Last Unicorn.

The problem with generic fantasy is that each fantasy world has two special characters - the landscape, and magic. In order to have a fantasy ruleset, there must be magic. But once magic has been introduced, a GM cannot introduce a different kind of magic to colour the world.

A second problem comes with genre. Works like Game of Thrones can sustain non-combat characters who are still interesting and changing. However, the D&D ruleset dictates that any pacifist characters must gain little-to-no XP, and must sit out lengthy combat sessions. The ruleset here is barely better, as XP is largely based on killing things.

All in all, I can invite people to 'make this ruleset your own', and say it's 'flexible', but I'm not sure there is any such thing as 'generic fantasy'.