Hrm... I see.
I do get why the branching would be limited at least.
But there are ways to make moral choices possible without it affecting the story too much.
If nothing else, allow for "false choices", which is merely a reaction without impact.
If there is not too many of them they give a good illusion of free will without impacting the gameplay.
But I understand this can be difficult if the whole premise of the game is centered around helping the poor.
You may want to add that to the description tho.
Some people like being nice, some dislike it.
It's always good to know what to expect.
But I have played many games, even made by a single person alone, that allows for moral choices that range from wicked to angelic.
Those type choices do not need to impact gameplay, because if the game needs you to help someone, as an example, you can choose:
1. Help them cuz it's the right thing to do
2. Help them because you need to uphold an appearance
3. Help them because you may need their help later / they look like someone who might pay you.
4. Consider leaving them to die, but concede it may be more beneficial to help them (for whatever reason that fits that scene.)
It lets people choose to not be a nice person, while their actions still remains the same.
Which makes people who want to play the hero feel better about themselves because they chose to act heroic, and the same for those who'd act the villain.
If you use that for your choices you can avoid branching the paths, while still giving the illusion of freedom.
(And I presume SOME choices are true choices that do make an impact. They must exist for this to be a game at all. But you can add false choices to improve the illusion of more freedom. Which improves how the game is received and seen.)