A: In practice, it would be awkward (at best) to obscure that information in any effective manner, but the reasons go beyond that. When asked, the Rules Manager (Eli “to the rescue” Shiffrin) said:

“You can tell which card is being looked at. When a random object changes zones, that object must be known immediately before performing the action in case replacement effects can affect that event. The same philosophy holds here, even though there’s no zone change involved and it’s unlikely that this event could ever be modified.”
Approved by Scott Marshall (and Eli Shiffrin!)

Urza’s Bauble

A:The token will end up the same as a normal token copy of Grizzly Bears: a 2/2 green Bear creature.

The Scarab God‘s ability includes modifications to the copy effect it creates, and these modifications become part of the token’s copiable values as part of applying that effect, so the token copy of Clone that it’s initially making would look like this:

Clone – {3}{U} (Black)
Creature – Zombie
You may have Clone enter the battlefield as a copy of any creature on the battlefield.
4/4

But this creature has a replacement ability that modifies how it enters the battlefield. You apply that ability and choose to copy Grizzly Bears, so now you take the Bear’s copiable values and apply them to the token, overwriting the existing characteristics. The Clone ability doesn’t include any exceptions or modifications to the copy effect it creates, so it copies all the Bears’ characteristics, and you get:

Grizzly Bears – {1}{G} (Green)
Creature – Bear
2/2
Approved by Callum Milne

A:There is no infraction in Player A’s statement/question. Some judges are just very cautious in this area because of where the conversation might lead.
Additional, bonus (MJM-only!) content: Bribery is a confusing topic, but it’s also a major concern for Wizards (similar to Improperly Determining A Winner), and that’s why we are encouraged to stand firm when enforcing this. That mentality, combined with the complexity of the policies, leads to too many players being inappropriately DQd. Please be sure to study the policy, and my and Toby’s [O] answers.

I’ll also pass along Andy Heckt’s wisdom: it’s better to steer players far, far away from the line than to try and help them tiptoe on the line. Instead of helping them figure out how to come close to Bribery without being DQd, guide them firmly back into safer conversations. Many senior judges have said, repeatedly, to be very pro-active and help players *before* they say something unfortunate. (I agree, completely.)
Approved by Scott Marshall

A:Noah has no responsibility for Adalbert’s misunderstanding. Since the Game Rules are what countered that ability, it could be argued that would fall under Derived Information, so Noah can’t lie about it, but he doesn’t have to answer questions that were never asked.

Approved by Scott Marshall
Earthshaker Khenra; Winding Constrictor; Grasp of Darkness

A: Spirit-Ancestral is not a combo, and playing to get your opponent to commit an infraction that might benefit you has never won a GP or Pro Tour. What Toby and I said before is just as applicable here: it’s not illegal, it’s not likely, and it’s not worth worrying about. 🙂

Quote by Toby: Unless there’s a sudden introduction of cards that makes this deck… vaguely good?… I don’t think we need to do a lot of worrying.

Quote by Scott: There is nothing wrong with laying a trap for your opponent, even one that … increases their chance of making a mistake. If that mistake happens to result in an infraction, then we – as neutral arbiters – apply the appropriate penalty and remedy, per the IPG. The educational aspect of those penalties will, hopefully, allow that player to avoid repeating that mistake.

Approved by Scott Marshall.
Spirit of the Labyrinth; Ancestral Vision; Thoughtseize

A:Players are not required to know the IPG; I’m reluctant to say they’re not expected to know it, as that implies it’s unexpected when they do – and many do. Players can’t intentionally violate the CR, nor the IPG. Please don’t jump to conclusions without first conducting a reasonable investigation. We know that Neville is intending to have Albus miss the trigger, but we can’t know that Neville intends to violate policy to accomplish that. If we were there – and none of us, except perhaps Florian (assuming this isn’t another hypothetical scenario), were actually there. Lacking the opportunity to chat a bit with the players, let’s not assume intent. A recommendation if you hear this: Ask something along the lines of “Is everything going okay over here?” It’s simple, it’s friendly, it’s customer-service-oriented, and it encourages the players to use the resources we provide, namely rules & policy expertise. And, as you noted, you aren’t intervening, you’re just offering an opportunity.
Khenra Eternal; Harrier Naga; Gift of Strength