In typing I have seen 4-vectors denoted in the same italic manner as scalars ($x$), with the case ostensibly clear from context. In these cases, often bold, Roman typesetting ($\mathbf{x}$) denotes 3-vectors.
Another method I have seen used, especially by people on the relativity side of the relativity/quantum divide, is arrows for 4-vectors ($\vec{x}$) and underlines for 3-vectors ($\underline{x}$). I personally like this notation because it distinguishes both from scalars and can be used in writing just as well as in typing.
However, I draw the line (no pun intended) at trying to extend this to higher-rank situations. Some people (I see this more on the engineering side of things) will use a double arrow or two over/underlines to denote 4- or 3-tensors of rank 2. At this point it's probably best to switch to index notation.
Of course, in pure mathematics often all such distinctions are dropped, and it is not uncommon for everything to be typeset in unadorned italic type.
Edit: Referring to MTW in particular, I will say this. The book is many things, but a lesson in good typesetting it is not. I've never seen so much use of bold - on italics and frakturs, on Greek letters, on nablas and differentials - and I've certainly never seen different levels of bold-ness being employed in the same text.