I may be mistaken, but I think you're saying I'm wrong.
You have a well-considered opinion, and I respect it. But if I were playing a Wizard and his options were getting narrower and narrower for avoiding a certain death, I'd hope my GM would allow me to attempt something crazy with some chance of success if it was the only way I could see to save his skin.
To be clear, I'm not thinking about 'bonus' effects to an attack, such as sundering a foe's weapon, etc., but more things in the realm of 'adventuring stunts' like chandelier swinging, and the like. Any character could attempt to throw sand in the face of an enemy and 'blind' them for a round, but only a Deed could blind them long-term.
Okay, your turn.
I don't think you and I are that far away from agreement. I did mention in my post that I would allow a non-warrior a chance to roll a die in a last-ditch crazy attempt, but it would only have a 1-in-20 chance of success. Some classes should be able to easily
achieve great physical acts of daring (or derring?) and some shouldn't. To me, Warriors are the only ones who can climb a rope in metal armour, leap across a bottomless pit without thinking, and swing an 18-pound hammer hard enough to break someone's shield. Wizards, Clerics and Thieves are the civilized and highly-skilled specialists whose lust for gold or ancient secrets have gotten them in way over their heads in this godforsaken pit miles underground. (Yes, Thieves are civilized - thieves without a city are just bandits. I'm not sure where brawny Thugs and nimble Assassins could fit into this mental picture of mine, but let's get back to my main point.)
Maybe that's just how I imagine the characters: the Warriors are the confident and athletic scouts, adventurers and brawlers. Wizards (and some Clerics) are pudgy, absent-minded and refined men of knowledge and lore. Possibly middle-aged, almost certainly lacking muscle tone. They might know how to swing a staff or mace, but not while simultaneously shoulder-rolling under the fire arrow trap and singing the only aria that keeps the Slumbering Sphinx from waking up. I just don't see them in any shape to act decisively when struggling with venomous jaws, inches from their neck. Sure, in Pathfinder you've got lithe, tumbling magic-users who can split an apple with a crossbow or flung dagger at 80 paces... but I get caught up in the atmosphere of App. N, and start thinking that class roles should be much more segregated in DCC. The counter-argument is that there is some overlap between a Thief who likes to fight and a Warrior who likes to steal... but if your instinct in battle is NOT to run away with the loot, then you probably shouldn't choose the Thief class.
From a storytelling point of view, If you're a MENSA-type genius Wizard able to conjure a rain of frogs each of whom can translate a different language for you, or otherwise alter the very laws of nature... then how did you ever let things get to this desperate state where a bookworm
needs to do the adventuring stunts? Yes, a "Hero's" solution is a crazy somersault over the lava and aiming a spear at the living statue's hidden weak point, but the Wizard should have had eighteen contingency plans to prevent its reanimation or nine henchmen to protect him after it does. Considering the cost of bandages, leeches, healing spells, replacing those little fabric stars off your hat... nine henchmen are cheap at any price. It's a business expense, anyway.
Having said all that, I know that players shouldn't be shackled if it would spoil the fun. If we were playing and your Wizard had a magical
stunt that he wanted to try in order to save the day at the last second... using a spell for a customized effect, or coercing some kind of "final strike" blast out of a Wand of Slipper Repair, then that stunt's wholly appropriate and more likely to succeed than some combat maneuver. Not an automatic success, but I always think creativity should be rewarded. Finding a solution to a challenge that fits your Wizard character's aptitude and class will have much greater probability than cross-class actions like attacking, grappling or dirty tricks.
As for swinging from chandeliers, I would call that a straight DEX roll (I mean Agility, sorry). When you get down to plain vanilla mechanics of the game, I think any class can attempt similar stunts (considering their natural ability scores). In desperate circumstances, does the DM let you attempt your life-saving maneuver as a basic ability check
or will he rule that it's a highly-unlikely "natural 20"-type action ill-suited to your character? Do you now regret your skilled roleplaying portrayal of a sickly hourglass-eyed
wizard with a wet hacking cough? If I were DM, I'd say in desperate circumstances any priest, sage or safecracker can try to leap over the horde of swamplings and pull the lever to block the tipping vat of acid-moss. But only a Hero can convert his momentum enough to subsequently rip the lever off barehanded and swing it like a club, batting swampling heads at the EHP like so many pulpy green golf balls.
So no, I'm not saying you're wrong, it's just a matter of perspective. Maybe I see a sharper distinction between run of the mill acts of bravery/feats of strength that anyone can attempt and the awe-inspiring (and frankly implausible) Mighty Deeds of Arms.