Yes. In the rules it says I only have to pay the Markup. “If the Thief has at least the Markup in Florins, reduce their Florins by the Markup and add a copy of the identified possession to the Thief’s inventory.”

It’s a simplw rule exploitation. I wouldn’t have done this otherwise.

See @Clucky? I told you this needed to be clarified.

The question is regarding the rule below:

Roll a DICE5 and add the result it to the identified Possession’s value. This is its Markup.

Is the this in the above rule referring to the result of adding the DICE5 to the Possession’s value, or is it referring to just the DICE5?

I guess we need the CfJ after all.

The Markup is defined in the previous sentence:

Roll a DICE5 and add the result it to the identified Possession’s value. This is its Markup.

The markup is the roll + the possession value.  That is clear.

@Junuper but you didn’t pay the markup. You paid only the dice roll.

not sure if you’re in the discord Juniper, but as I mentioned there as this seems to have stemmed from a misunderstanding of how markup was calculated I’d fully support a CFJ undoing all the steps you wouldn’t have done if you got the markup calculation right