A scientific paper shouldn't tell a good story but present a strong argument

A recent Impact Blog post extolled the benefits of using a storytelling approach when writing a scientific paper. However, while such an approach might well make for a compelling read, does providing an arresting narrative come at the expense of the reader's critical engagement with the paper? Thomas Basbøll argues that the essential "drama" of any scientific paper stems from the conversation that reader and writer are implicitly engaged in. It is more efficient to think of your paper as series of claims to be supported, elaborated or defended according to the difficulty a knowledgeable reader will experience when faced with them.