The ultimate limits of quantum state discrimination are often thought to be captured by asymptotic bounds that restrict the achievable error probabilities, notably the quantum Chernoff and Hoeffding bounds. Here we study hypothesis testing protocols that are permitted a probability of producing an inconclusive discrimination outcome, and investigate their performance when this probability is suitably constrained. We show that even by allowing an arbitrarily small probability of inconclusiveness, the limits imposed by the quantum Hoeffding and Chernoff bounds can be significantly exceeded. This completely circumvents the conventional trade-offs between error exponents in hypothesis testing while incurring only a vanishingly small overhead over conventional approaches. Such improvements over standard state discrimination are robust and can be obtained even when an exponentially vanishing probability of inconclusive outcomes is demanded. Relaxing the constraints on the inconclusive probability can enable even larger advantages, but this comes at a price. We show a 'strong converse' property of this setting: targeting error exponents beyond those achievable with vanishing inconclusiveness necessarily forces the probability of inconclusive outcomes to converge to one. By exactly quantifying the rate of this convergence, we give a complete characterisation of the trade-offs between error exponents and rates of conclusive outcome probabilities. Overall, our results provide a comprehensive asymptotic picture of how the allowance for inconclusive measurement outcomes reshapes optimal quantum hypothesis testing.