What makes a par 5 different is the fact that the green can be hit in regulation having struck a second shot short of it. The possibility of setting up a two putt birdie by going for the green in two is one thing that can make a par 5 interesting, but there needs to be some risk associated with that choice. It's a bad (or at least unmemorable) par 5 where the result of a poorly executed attempt to reach in 2 shots is an easy pitch on. It's also a poor par 5 where there's no interest in the lay up shot. On a reachable par 5 that lay up should be significantly less dangerous than going for the green in two but it should still offer interest, which more often than not involves asking questions by offering options. Hazards in the likely lay-up area can be one way of doing this.
I think the 3 par 5s at Muirfield are a great example of par 5s that ask questions on all shots. Each is reachable in 2 for elite golfers, the 9th is reachable for most in favourable conditions but each has a challenging drive. Each asks questions on the 2nd shot (there's a bunker on the left just about where most golfers might play their lay up on 5, there's OOB on 9 on the left, which is where you want to come in from, there are fearsome cross bunkers to decide whether to carry on 17). 5 has a much more interesting green than 9 or 17 but is probably easier to hit. 9 can be a brute into the prevailing wind and 17 may well be the best of the three.