Currently my consistent game group is made up of 3 people (me and two others). It seems that this game assumes more people in the fellowship in several area's (assignments during journeys, the ability to be in a rearward stance, etc..)

Any tips for making this game work better with so few players?

Lots of people have been known to travel the Wild alone. Take the Rangers, for instance, or the Wizards.

It is certainly more dangerous, but there is no need to change the rules of the game. Either take along some bodyguards or rely on your own skills.

should work fine

i run to 2 to 5 players, and it all works fine

Be happy you have a group ...looks like I may be commuting 144 miles RT just to get in on game. To many 4th ed. Dweebs and Pathfinder fruits in my area.
The travel is conditional if I get the wife (household 6) approval for TDY.

The companions travel 72 miles by horse, over Moderate terrain, through wild lands in the spring. The journey takes 3 days. Each companion must make 1 Fatigue test at TN 16. If the journey takes the companions into blighted lands, each must make a Corruption test once every 7 days at TN 14.

couldnt resist

What would be the TN for persuading my wife?

I don't know about your wife, but I tend to rely on hope and a high favourite heart score. This is one tough TN imo.

Merely asking garners you a Corruption point ... and perhaps a wound.

Yeah she is the dark lord spouseron, somehow my ring doesn't give me any powers. Invisibility would be nice and an "off" button would be nice. Or the black breath to make my kids go to sleep at a decent hour.

The only thing that you might need to review would be the rules for rearward stance.
I am in the same situation regarding players for the short term. One of the pcs is a Barding Bowman. So that he doesn't get a bum deal until our third player becomes available, I intend to start some combat encounters at a greater distance and allow two or sometimes three opening volleys before melee commences. Of course, it won't work if the players have been ambushed and the number of opening volleys will depend on terrain and other situational considerations.

Also, if there are only one or two opponents you could rule that Rearward stance is used as normal as long as the second character is in any other stance.

Yes, I was considering this as well.

The 'fix' that immediately comes into mind would be trading combat advantage dice against rounds of reward stances, or something of the sort. That or you play it by RaW and accept that reward stance isn't something that is going to happen unless under very special circumstances. That doesn't leave archery out completely, but it means it becomes a fight or flight game (which is kinda fun IMO).

I do like the idea of trading combat advantage against rounds in rearward stance. It isn't overly complex and suits the abstract nature of the rules quite well.

A more role-playing oriented approach would be to simply ask the player to describe how his character avoids being drawn into close combat - allowing good ideas he does come up with to substitute for combat advantages. I admit this works only for a style of play that is somewhat descriptive.

If I needed a rule to fall back on, I would probably use the "trade CA vs. RS" rule. Sounds fine to me.

The thing I really like about the rule is that there is still a value in having a third companion but it allows the bowman to at least get some shots on the opposition.

It could indeed be a very nice touch to stress that when you have a very small group of adventurers they need to be that much more attentive to terrain in order to get those opportunities to use rearward stance. Which seems appropriate. This could appeal to both those players who enjoy tactical play, and those who like to tell a tale.

I guess as LM you'd need to be mindful of presenting the opportunities. Things as simple as being up on a big rock, or behind a fallen tree seem like they could work, right?

Just a quick comment concerning Bleddyn's traveling & your wife's permission: A sense of a humor is a good thing - you've all given me a quick chuckle.

Yeah the brief thread hijack was worth it.